Intro to Media Criticism Fall 09

2009-12-14T23:29:00.001-08:00

Ok I know we're basically done with the semester and the blogs but I just wanted to share this article because it's currently featured on the very front center of CNN's homepage...I think it really speaks to America's obsession with celebrities... -__-;;

Because Chris Brown's Twitter is REALLY the Breaking News of the Century...?

DTC Ads

2009-12-13T10:41:00.001-08:00

I'm always amazed by the amount of DTC advertisements made by pharmaceutical companies on television, and I am even more caught off guard when it is for medications that treat erectile disfunction such as Viagra. It really says something about the things we allow to be broadcast with regard to censorship. The male anatomy is a very taboo topic on television compared to our comfort level with the female body, so I'm always a little surprised that nobody flinches when a commercial comes on TV warning men to seek medical attention if he experiences an erection lasting more than four hours. ED medication is the first thing that comes to mind when talking about DTC ads because I think they are the most prolific, and it is interesting to observe their success. As we discussed in class, the DTC ads usually include a checkbox of symptoms, and by the end of the commercial, the men watching are convinced they are impotent. Granted, I'm sure this drug does wonders for people whose sex lives are on the way out due to ED, but it becomes dangerous when men are using it illegally for recreational purposes.

Using a drug for anything other than its intended purpose is always risky, but the nitrates in Viagra can cause an extremely unsafe drop in blood pressure that can be fatal to someone with a healthy blood pressure. The main cause of impotence in men is high blood pressure, which prevents the blood from flowing to the right places, so the drug aims to lower blood pressure temporarily, so when someone with normal blood pressure uses Viagra, the blood pressure can plummet. The advertisements should focus more on this aspect of the drug that they know exists, but instead they focus of marketing with the idea that the consumer can do it "whenever the time is right".

Technology Incorporated in Media

2009-12-12T15:02:00.000-08:00

Different modes of technology influence us everyday. Through new technological developments we are affected by the media. In our world today we are constantly updated with news, ads and events through our cellphones or by some sort of device we use everyday.
It seems like most people either have a IPhone or Blackberry two leading cellphone brands and everyday the people with these devices are updated with news from all around the world.
Media Plays such an important role in influencing what is important in our society. If it wasn't for these new devices that allow us to be informed about what is going on in the world we would not be so much emphasis on news, movies, and tv shows.
The news is framed into a particular way to show more emphasis on certain events which make us believe, that is more important. These frame's may happen because of top executives who cannot report real facts because of their investors who allow their programs to run. If it isn't for advertisers, networks would not be able to air their shows to the public without charging them.
Also, Movie and TV show critics, report more on certain shows to spark the popularity of the show. Through this tactic more people watch these shows because they may seem more popular or appealing. Media effects what we watch and think about in this world. Our perspectives are changed through the way media represents it to the public.

Science with a Racial Slant

2009-12-12T00:25:00.000-08:00

Science can easily be manipulated and used for negative purposes, because no one really knows the absolute answers. A new discovery always comes up, and while one can think they know the scientific cure it can always change. For this reason, it can be taken and used for propaganda purposes. It has legitimacy, even though it is still this unknown aspect of civilization. The Nazis used “scientific” explanations to demonstrate why Jews, Gypsies and other groups of people were inferior to the Aryan race. Physicians would measure the eyes, skulls and noses of the Jewish people in order to measure what they said was the Jewish intelligence. They also did very torturous experiments on woman and twins. They basically used Jews as guinea pigs in order to look for new discoveries, and perhaps find more differences between the Jews and the Aryans. The public associates doctors with honesty and having a desire for the common good, so by having a doctor talk about the deficiencies in the Jewish race, the public believed it.

This was also taught in school, thus young kids believed in the inferiority of the Jewish race when they heard scientific research demonstrated it. Putting a racial slant on science has been a common technique throughout history in order to alienate a group of people whether by religion, race, or nationality. It was used against Africans to encourage slavery and make it ok to treat them as less than human. It was used with African tribes in Rwanda and it is still used today in other milder forms. We must always remember that while science contains what are called facts, the answers are never totally absolute since science is beyond human control and can only be studied from a distance. It is a dangerous thing when its’ legitimacy is used to reaffirm pre-existing racist values.

Oh capitalism.

2009-12-11T23:01:00.001-08:00

As we have discussed in class, science / scientific "back-up" naturally allows us to feel more secure about a product or issue. The discussion of Yaz and birth control pills made me think twice about how people are advertising these "safer sex" products to women. Most products have extreme side-effects, such as heart attack, stroke, and blood clots in the heart, lung, or brain. Yet no one is outraged, protesting against these pills. We have become so used to hearing the short blurb about possible negative side-effects. Also, the advertisements are strategically ordered and presented so the audience does not really get too riled up about the serious side-effects.

I found the birth control pill information site by Planned Parenthood. It seems like the reason why medical products' websites and advertisements discuss the negative symptoms so casually at the end of the ad (or page) is to achieve maximum profit. The website's information about "the disadvantages of using the birth control pill" does not straight up even say heart attack, stroke, etc. in the list, but after 5 paragraphs, at the end. In our capitalist society, the driving force is money. Is it too harsh to say that the driving force for money is greed? Maybe I'm getting too cynical, but the truth is, many people are deceived and exploited by companies, corporations, and other people, for money and profit. These birth control ads and websites are trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies, but at the same time, they are doing their best to rake in as much money as they can get. It is difficult to trust anything when you see that our society is based on deception and greed.

(However, not to be such a downer, I believe advertisements can be used to compel, interest, and bring people together to do things that are good as well.)

1 Less- Gardasil Vaccine

2009-12-11T21:34:00.000-08:00

When the Gardasil vaccine came out, I remember many of the women I knew were rushing to have their daughters vaccinated. When I refused the vaccine, first at my primary care physician's and then at a doctor here in New York, they acted like I was crazy. I've just never been one to take a medication or vaccine that is so new and to be quite honest, not really necessary. I find it fascinating that the commercial (above) can't even definitely say that the vaccine does what it is supposed to do. The dialogue keeps saying "may protect" and strains of HPV that "might cause" cervical cancer. We've discussed society's relationship to health care so many times in class and I think that this commercial is a perfect example of American society's irrational need to find a fix for everything. Oh, by the way, the vaccine "may not protect everyone". The thing that jumps out at me the most, however, is the language used to talk about what the vaccine protects against. Cancer is the most emphasized word and at the end of the commercial, the vaccine is called the cervical cancer vaccine. This is clearly playing on America's fear of and obsession with cancer. But the vaccine doesn't protect against cancer, it protects against a few (of many) strains of HPV that might cause cancer. It seems to me that society has an insatiable desire to treat peoples' ailments or potential ailments even when we don't fully understand the nature of the problem and/or solution.

P.S. The vaccine can have some pretty scary side effects... ones that the commercial doesn't mention:

And while we're on the topic of unnecessary medical procedures...

I have never been one to get the seasonal flu shot. Maybe it's a West Coast thing or a California thing or a Bay Area thing, but where I grew up, the only people who got flu shots were ones with compromised immune systems. Since coming to New York, I've met perfectly healthy people who get flu shots every winter and several physicians have tried to persuade me to get it. My worst experience was at the NYU Health Center when I was sick earlier this semester. The physician who examined me suggested I get the seasonal flu shot and when I didn't, he tried to guilt me into it by listing all the different people I could get sick and potentially kill by not getting a flu shot. This was fascinating to me because the argument seemed to be framed around the idea that it was my duty to get the vaccine.

It’s the Most Caffeinated Time of the Year

2009-12-11T21:19:00.000-08:00

Lo and behold, amid the twinkling lights and passersby with their brightly wrapped packages and the ten-thousandth playing of Mariah Carey’s ‘All I Want from Christmas,’ there exists another season on college campuses all across United States: finals season.

And like any major event in the U.S., this season has its corporate sponsors. In recent years, none has been more present than the Austrian company Red Bull GmbH. This past week the company’s red, white, blue, and yellow cars with the rotating beverage affixed to the hood have been stationing themselves at various high traffic points around NYU’s campus including Bobst, Cantor, and Silver. Representatives have been passing out free cans of the energy drink along with a small, accordion booklet that is a perfect example of target marketing. With a cartoon bull parody of Sir Edmund scaling Mount Everest, the cover states that “if you want to stay on top of things in this 24/7 world, you’ll need some wings.” Then on both sides of the booklet, the same cartoon bull depicts the many ways Red Bull can be beneficial. One side explains what is in the drink while the opposite shows how different types of people including people in the work force, students, hard partying night owls, and the super-star wonder mom have all realized how Red Bull can help propel them through their hectic lives.

And if Red Bull’s familiar claims to increase performance and concentration, improve reaction speed, increase endurance, and stimulate metabolism weren’t enough, a study at the University of Loughborough incorporation with the British Ministry of Environment and Transportation has cited Red Bull as a positive influence on cognitive as well as reactionary performance. Of course, the sales pitch does its best not to bring attention to the fine print. The study’s results were limited to the improvement in the “efficiency of a ‘functional energy’ drink in counteracting driver sleepiness.’ As we all know anything with caffeine in it will stimulate your body to some extent, and the fine points of the study including the drink’s range of effectiveness in correlation to the driver’s exhaustion are left up to the proactive consumer to pursue.

Interestingly, in the pamphlet Red Bull goes beyond listing its healthiest aspects including taurine and vitamins B6 and B12 to including crouching the carbohydrates and sugars as a “unique mixture of substances [that] results in a dose of pure energy.”

Though this is not necessarily medical based media criticism, I believe that Red Bull operates with the same bill of fare as the ads for Lunesta and Gardasil. They emphasize the benefits of the product, but glaze over the consequences of excessive or improper use. Furthermore, at least most people take prescriptions with a grain of seriousness while with regards to energy drinks; less savory consumers may believe that he or she is receiving an appropriate amount of vitamins. They keep chugging it down without a second thought which leads to its own medical complications such as elevated heart rate as in the case of this University of Lincoln which may have contributed her death. (http://www.heraldscotland.com/red-bull-caffeine-drink-may-have-helped-cause-student-s-death-1.901617 ) Therefore, during this crazy final season, perhaps we should think twice about how many energy drinks we’re guzzling down when ninety minutes—an entire sleep cycle—may be just as refreshing and less harmful.

Censorship in South Park

2009-12-11T21:16:00.000-08:00

I have already posted my blog entry for the week (about Ambien CR and overmedication), but I came across this clip recently, and thought it was relevant.

On the subject of censorship on television (regarding the first presentation during the last class), I thought the following episode of South Park addressed the issue rather humorously:

http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/103944/

["It Hits the Fan" Season 5 Episode 1]

In this episode, everyone makes a huge deal about how characters on a police drama will say "Sh*t" on television, while saying the word several times themselves (as shown by a ticker that keeps track of how many times it is said on the bottom right of the screen), thereby highlighting the difference between television and reality.

Science in Popular Culture.

2009-12-11T19:17:00.000-08:00

"The idea that science is a separate social realm, dedicated to discovering laws of nature unaffected by ideologies or politics, has been a myth surrounding the hard sciences" (Struken/Cartwright).

Sherlock Holmes is briefly mentioned in this chapter so I thought about investigation stories and popular culture detective genre. As such, detective stories have social commentary ranging from having a strong emphasis on scientific evolution, such as in the stories of Sherlock Holmes, to the moral decay and hopelessness of the times as portrayed in later works of "The Maltese Falcon" or "farewell My Lovely."

Sherlock Holmes exalts in solving the unknown crime and as scientific genius finds resolution, involved in an ambiguous game of science and knowledge. He is respected by Scotland Yard, and reflects the optimism of budding scientific discoveries, such as the finger print. To solve crimes he relies heavily on science, however limited it seems by comparison to present day shows like CSI, Bones and the like. But it is more interesting to me how according to Sturken and Cartwright, "Scientific looking does not occur in isolation from other social context although society may have some stake in seeing science as a separate social realm"

In original stories/films of Sherlock Holmes, there is a strong emphasis on scientific evolution whereas the new Guy Richie Sherlock Holmes has an emphasis on technology and digital imagery. Based on the trailer it would appear that this movie is less about science and more about turning a scientific genius into a swash buckling ham, having very little to do with scientific skills. What reflection on the times does this film cast now in comparison to the "you have less frontal development than I expected" turn of the century? It seems to me the latter celebrates our era of technology and computer generated enhancements, suspense of disbelief, and an ideology of the hero will save the day. Without having seen it, it is hard to say, but what I did see in the trailer is enough to recognize a very different social point of view. I'll be curious to see if this Sherlock Holmes does cocaine and locks himself away in the world of the 'other' as he did in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle brilliant original depiction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUQbmFAE5WI New Version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOyKEZUyiDc Older Version (full film)

The Choice: Good Health vs Sleep

2009-12-11T18:44:00.000-08:00

AMBIEN CR promises to relieve those suffering from insomnia, as shown in one of its many commercials below:

However, here's a video telling us about the actual medication, without the fancy visuals:

The points that I missed during the first commercial, obviously distracted by the clever use of the rooster, I managed to pick up during the more scientific second video: Ambien is addictive, it is a hallucinogen, it can be fatal (albeit in rare cases), and may cause the taker to eat or drive without having any recollection of having done so. These points are not hammered home by the commercial: the calming voice tells us that even though it will have adverse side effects, we shouldn't mind because it puts us to sleep.

This leads me to ask the following question: Should insomniacs have to choose between taking a drug that sedates them to the point of hallucinations and may have a long-term effect on their brain, or staying relatively healthy but not being able to sleep?

Another important point to note is that Ambien can only be used over a short period of time without causing permanent damage to the body. Therefore, actual insomniacs will have to revert to not being able to sleep (as they cannot continue taking sleep aides after a certain amount of time). This negates the purpose of the medication for people who actually need it. It also encourages its use by people who only can't fall asleep sometimes, thereby ensuring that they turn to medication instead of something simpler (and better for them) such as a cup of hot tea.

These were just some thoughts to supplement our discussion on the rising use of medication to accomplish tasks that aren't necessarily impossible.

Doc, I Got The RLS. Bad.

2009-12-11T18:43:00.000-08:00

I made a comment in class about the fact that whenever a "Restless Leg Syndrome" commercial aired, I started to feel the symptoms and was convinced I had this rare, yet treatable disease with the help of GlaxoSmithKline drugs. Turns out what these pharmaceutical companies are doing is "disease mongering" or

"enlarging the market for a treatment by convincing people that they are sick and need medical intervention. Typically, the disease is vague, with nonspecific symptoms spanning a broad spectrum of severity—from everyday experiences many people would not even call “symptoms,” to profound suffering. The market for treatment gets enlarged in two ways: by narrowing the definition of health so normal experiences get labeled as pathologic, and by expanding the definition of disease to include earlier, milder, and presymptomatic forms (e.g., regarding a risk factor such as high cholesterol as a disease)

What was most interesting to me is that in 2003 GlaxoSmithKline launched a campaign for raise awareness for Restless Leg Syndrome. The idea of a drug company trying to raise awareness for a particular disease should raise some eyebrows. They're not a charitable or research organization. They just want to make money off of people's hypochondriaric ways.

In 2005 they issued a press release titled "New survey reveals common yet under recognized disorder—restless legs syndrome—is keeping Americans awake at night." It just so happens that later in 2005, the FDA approved the drug ropinirole as a treatment method for RLS.

Furhermore, both the media and GlaxoSmithKline stressed the “…relatively few doctors know about restless legs. This is the most common disorder your doctor has never heard of" angle. Which basically says, we here at GlaxoSmithKline know more than your doctors do, you better tell them what's going on.

So let's recap. In 2003, a drug company starts a campaign to raise awareness for a little known "disease" (if you can even call it that). Then they release a document which plays into the mystery surrounding the "disorder." Notice how it's called a disorder because it is not medically recognized as a disease. The term "disorder" connotes the idea that there is something out of the ordinary, or something that we can fix that is keeping us up at night. I also just realized that GlaxoSmithKline did an incredible job of introducing another aspect into the mix. Not only are they marketing pills for their ADD leg disease, but by talking about insomnia, they are subtly referencing their sleep medication Ambien, and a host of other sleeping pills they produce. Finally, they urge consumers to educate their doctors. They are literally telling me, a 20-year-old college student to tell my ivy-league educated, award-winning, book-publishing doctor that there's a disease out there, of which she's not familiar, but that she shouldn't worry because GlaxoSmithKline has got us covered.

Science, Religion, and Holy Cows

2009-12-11T16:46:00.000-08:00

This week we talked about scientific looking and how it is a discourse like every other. We are still in that Enlightenment mentality that says science = truth, when in reality it is subject to bias like every other. Corporations fund studies, governments mandate vaccinations, and DNA evidence can convict almost anybody.

You know the discourse of science has spiraled out of control when it is being used to prove everything under the sun. We have been indoctrinated with the science vs religion but even that seems to collapse under the weight of science.

I found this video of a cow born in Connecticut with what looks like a cross on his forehead. (Actually I think it looks more like a lightning bolt. Reminds me of Harry Potter, or Lady Gaga.) The owner proclaims it must be "divine intervention" because she knows all about "reproduction and genetics". Really? I don't know if the cross on the calf's forehead is at all a message to us lowly beings, but I do know one thing, those breeders were pretty quick to call the local news. How sacred is a cow that's used for press? really what the breeders want is "higher milk prices". I don't think Jesus would want to further raise the cost of living his people are already jobless, hungry, and in debt.

Things Are Getting Ridiculous

2009-12-11T14:28:00.000-08:00

I first saw this poster in a subway car directly after leaving one of our Media Criticism classes... and well... it's asking for it! This advertisement almost blatantly attempts to play off of the normal cliche's that plague the advertising industry.

The advertisement is for Remy Martin, purveyor of "fine cognac", but how would you ever even know that? Unless you recognize their trademark centaur logo in the bottom left of the poster, or you can read the almost-fine print label under the "Remy Martin" label in the other corner, there is literally nothing in the advertisement that indicates it is for an alcoholic beverage. Because of this, it becomes clearly evident that the entire campaign is focused on drawing in customers simply because of the innuendos presented by the two women and the cliche tagline "Things are getting interesting".

For starters, this ad is incredibly demeaning towards women, using them as bait almost to attract male customers. To take this further, who are "things getting interesting" for? The women? OR, the man admiring the two flirtatious women? In both instances, women are depicted as being mere objects for men; objects used to pleasure men in some manner. This sort of advertising is so over used that it is often surprising that it dominates the liquor industry even still. It is my hope that people become more critical of these sort of cheap gimmecks; so much so that the industry is forced to alter their advertising strategies. With enough social change, hopefully this demeaning depiction of women can be less prevalent in media, and eventually vanish entirely.

Food Inc: Capitalism and the Food Industry

2009-12-11T14:24:00.000-08:00

In Robert Kenner’s documentary titled, Food Inc., Kenner, with the help of authors Eric Schlosser and Michael Pollan, as well as countless other farmers and other players in the food production business, works to shed some light on the greatly veiled food industry that exists today. The documentary contemplates the role of ethics within the current method of raw food production, as well as how the methods are largely a response to the growth of the fast food industry since the 1950s and what that says about American capitalism.
I have always been greatly interested in the food production industry, as well as in issues of animal cruelty. As a result, I have seen many documentaries over the years that depict the horrible ways in which animals are treated in our food production industry. For this reason, I was less shocked with the horrific images within the documentary than I was of the overwhelming role that American capitalism has played in reaching the state that the industry is currently in. For the first time, this connection between capitalism and the negative aspects of our food industry was clearly illuminated.
While watching the documentary, it was shocking to see how often I found myself comparing the food industry to today’s media. The reason why both are so similar is because both systems are heavily rooted in capitalism. The food industry, as mentioned earlier, was greatly changed when the idea of fast food was introduced. In order to make the most money, big fast food chains relied heavily on their food providers. As chains became more popular and profitable, so did certain food suppliers who were then able to buy up other companies, resulting in fewer suppliers. Now, there are essentially only a handful of companies that run our entire food system.
What happened to the food industry is basically what also happened to the media industry. In order to make the most profit, media companies began to converge resulting in fewer companies controlling the entire media system. In addition, in just the same way that food is being mass produced and it’s quality can be considered to be going down, many aspects of the media can be seen as following the same trend. In news for example, news reports are forced to fit in with the capitalist agenda determined by the companies that run them. Often, this results in a decrease in the quality of news reporting, as reports often cover noncontroversial issues in order to gain more profits in advertisement sales. Whether news reports or BigMacs, capitalism and the desire for profit that stems from it has greatly hampered both food and media systems.
To combat this, Kenner submits a notion that is very much similar to Michael Moore’s advice for combating capitalism in his documentary Capitalism: A Love Story. Like Moore, Kenner suggests that the power rests in the average person, not the big businesses that rule almost every sector of the Western market. Schlosser said it best, stating “the irony is that the average consumer doesn’t think of themselves as very powerful… [but] when we run an item across the scanner, we are voting! For local or not, organic or not…” Essentially, Schlosser asserts that individuals can, in fact, fight “the man” even if just little by little… purchase by purchase. Often when facing big businesses whose influence is terrifying, such as in the case of the food industry, an individual could take on a defeatist attitude. This documentary however was greatly empowering and hopefully it can assist in creating the cultural change necessary to empower others to realize that each item they purchase is a vote they are casting as well.

correction

2009-12-11T14:13:00.000-08:00

sorry - re-reading and I realized I wrote that drug companies "pour hundreds of dollars into advertising"...meant to say "hundreds of MILLIONS"

Adderall for all

2009-12-11T13:29:00.000-08:00

Perhaps it is in the nature of Attention Deficit Disorder that its diagnosis is difficult to confirm or deny. Since it is a behavioral problem, its symptoms are described, rather than confirmed through blood tests. A combination of zealous doctors and impatient parents contributes to the drugs' saturation of young American society. I am in no way trying to discredit the validity or seriousness of the disorder, as there are people who benefit greatly from medication. I do believe, however, that many children are unnecessarily taking the drug. Regardless of my feelings on Adderall, the drug is an interesting topic with respect to media.

What I find so interesting about Adderall as it relates to Media is that the drug is the leading of its kind. The brand "Adderall" was not introduced until 1996 and unlike prescription drugs intended for use to treat problems such as high blood pressure/cholesterol, depression or osteoporosis, Adderall does not advertise through popular media outlets. The companies behind Lipitor, Zoloft, Boniva, Valtrex, etc. all pour hundreds of dollars into advertisements: tv spots, print ads, online pop-ups. Adderall, on the other hand, is advertised through primary or secondary sources - either by doctors themselves, or parents of children who are on the drug. I don't know a lot about the prescription drug industry, but I suspect the reason many drugs are advertised is because of competition. While I could name at least three medications for high blood pressure, I could only name one drug for ADD: Adderall.

In recent years, the drug has carved a whole new market amongst college students looking for an academic edge. Even in people without difficulty focusing on a regular basis, Adderall can improve concentration. Where many drugs have negative effects (or none at all) when consumed by people not suffering from the disorder they are intended to treat, Adderall is fairly mild. In addition to inducing unnatural focus, the drug is known to decrease appetite. This, of course, appeals to an entirely different (an enormous) market: people looking to loose weight. I've posted the url below for an article posted on CNN.com that discusses the appeal of the drug as a dietary supplement:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/03/21/vs.adderall/index.html

It'll be interesting to follow this drug - I wonder if it will become so common that a weaker version will be available over the counter in the future...

"One less" life.

2009-12-11T12:09:00.000-08:00

I'm sure everyone is aware of the semi-new vaccine "Gardasil". The vaccine is targeted at preventing HPV, with could prevent forms of cervical cancer. When it was first released I remember handfuls of my friends going to get it. So of course as a dumb consumer I decided that maybe it was a good idea to get it as well. It's sad to say that I did no research on it first, when I asked my mom if it was a good idea she said sure, so I went ahead and got the series of three shots. As time goes on there are more and more controversies linked to this vaccine. It's been released that three girls actually died just hours after getting the shot. Two of the girls were only 12 and 19. All of their deaths were due to blood clotting or heart problems.

"the 1,637 adverse vaccination reactions reported to the FDA via the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) included 371 serious reactions. Of the 42 women who received the vaccine while pregnant, 18 experienced side effects ranging from spontaneous abortion to fetal abnormities "

In the commercial they are promoting female empowerment, and the control over your own body. They show that YOU have the choice to protect yourself. But really in this case the risks of side-effects greatly outweigh the benefits of this vaccine because though human papilloma virus is scary it is also treatable, it isn't necessarily life threatening. Do you really want to be One-Less?

YAZ

2009-12-11T08:08:00.001-08:00

After we discussed prescription drug ads on class last time, I suddenly started looking for different ads on YouTube like a freak. I found an ad from YAZ birth control from 2007. Although many of the ads I saw used many techniques we discussed in class when explaining side effects, (i.e. turning the music higher, changing the letters, using a voice over, etc.) I feel like this commercial in specific was very explicit about the side effects of Yaz. Instead of hiding them with music and voice overs, one of the actual actresses talks about them. All the other aspects of this commercial reflect the norm in prescription drug ads (the party, music, young friends in a conversation), the only difference is how the side effects are mentioned. I believe this to be a very bold move in part of the company, but at the same time we can see the newer ads in which they resort to the techniques we talked about in class. Also, something else that needs to be mentioned is the fact that they promote how this pill helps with PMDD and not how it is a contraceptive, which is something else we discussed in class.

Check the commercial!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipTjROfdkV4

The Invasion of Doctor's Offices By Something Other Than Germs

2009-12-10T20:41:00.000-08:00

After our discussion of the pharmaceutical advertising in America, I began to think of Drug Representatives, and how this is seen as a sound profession in this country. Basically, Drug Reps are people who go around to doctors offices, enticing the doctors with a whole lot of junk (pens, notepads, etc.) so that the doctor will write a prescription for their product. In essence, these drug reps are just legalized drug dealers, which I think is kinda bizarre.

My sister is currently in her last year of pharmacy school and as a requirement for graduation, has to go on rotations where she works in various clinics and pharmacies to get a sense for opportunities in the pharmaceutical field. On one of her rotations at a nursing home for the elderly, she described how she witnessed one of these drug reps who came into the home dressed in scrubs so that they could better connect with the doctors who also wore scrubs (she could identify the rep based on the fact that drug reps wear badges, and she saw this badge pinned to his scrubs); after all, a doctor is probably more likely to sit down with and listen to a drug rep who is dressed in the same attire as he or she is, rather than one who is dressed in a fancy business suite and might be seen as too fancy for a hospital like setting. It is just weird the lengths that these people will go to in order to sell their product. She was describing another time when she happened to be in a doctor's office outside of work and she noticed that all of the receptionist were writing with pens advertising a drug, on pads of paper advertising this same drugs, in addition to posters for this drug being prominently displayed. It was a clear sign that the office had been visited by a drug rep.

I think this whole concept is just plain disturbing because it makes you wonder how many doctors write prescriptions for unnecessary drugs just because of these drug reps and their peddling of persciption drugs. Especially unnerving is the fact that drug reps don't need to have a background in medicine or pharmacy which means they probably have little knowledge about their drugs, other than what they learned from the company that makes the drug.

2009-12-10T19:15:00.000-08:00

So I was just watching one of the new episodes of "Scrubs" on Hulu and up pops one of those one minute long commercial break interruptions and I just had to pause in the middle of the show to blog about it, as it was about Ambien, the sleeping pill :P
The first 15 seconds of the commercial features a rooster (cultural sign/image icon woohoo!) following a woman around with a voice-over asking, "Still tired of morning coming at the middle of the night? Still tired the next day, too?" By 0:17 the tired woman is tucking herself into bed peacefully because Ambien "helps you fall asleep quickly" (with a small caption at the bottom that reads "Dramatization" haha). By 0:22 the narrator is already reading off the warnings and side effects for using Ambien....and continues to do so for the next 36 seconds (with more captions detailing additional warnings) before smoothly transitioning into a suggestion to "ask your doctor about Ambien" during the last two seconds of the commercial.
While all of these warnings and disclaimers are going on, the video shows the obnoxious rooster leaving the woman's room and going away down the street as she sleeps peacefully and wakes up refreshed in the morning. Apparently, the possibility of sleepwalking, driving with memory loss, and possible risk of suicide and fatality aren't really that important when it comes to getting your 6-7 hours of sleep and making the rooster go away. Go figure.

Cialis

2009-12-10T18:53:00.000-08:00

Since the hot topic this week in class discussion was about drug ads, I figured I'd bring in the male enhancement portion of them. I think it is crazy that pharmeceutical companies can even advertise on TV, but it is very strange that we allow male enhancement ads. These ads are especially frequent on sports channels, during football and later at night. I personally do not like these ads with all of the male and female fondling, and the awkward fake intimacy of the actors. I don't necessarily like these ads at all, nor do I really care to watch them.

Cialis is a brand that has advertisements all over the television. Men with erectile dysfunction are supposed to take the 36 hour pill. Of course the ad also says talk to your doctor to see if Cialis is right for you. I agree that it is very strange that people are being asked to ask their doctors to take a pill. The doctor is no longer suggesting a pill, but the patient is. It is a complete reversal of roles. But these commercials are trying to promote the product and get men to believe they have erectile dysfunction or that they need this miracle drug to help their sex lives. The commercial only quickly discusses (in the very fast talking, while people are floating around being super happy) the possible symptoms such as back pain, indigestion, headache, muscle aches and more serious things like decrease or loss of vision and hearing. I think that that is kind of a big deal, although I'm glad that the side effects do not say that death or heart attack is possible. It also says that if your erection last longer then 4 hours, you should call your doctor. I can't imagine that that would be a nice experience for anyone. I am glad that these companies are supposed to tell the side effects though because they are very important for the consumer. Overall, I think that it is ridiculous that the US still allows these ads on TV. People should tell their doctors what their problems are and then the doctor should suggest products, not the other way around.

Latisse

2009-12-09T12:44:00.000-08:00

Of all the absurd medications and procedures advertised on television, the advertisements for the new prescription Latisse featuring Brooke Shields takes the cake! The new gel gives people fuller and longer eyelashes and requires daily application. Instead of buying a high end mascara or in the worst case have a professional put on some extensions, Latisse suggests that women actually apply a potentially harmful new drug to their eyelids. On the Latisse website it is recommended the product should be used like "every other routine," making it appear like no big deal. When I tried to find the side effects I also had some difficulty. There is a safety section that mentions "possible side effects" which include things such as itchiness or redness and more concerning side effects such as skin darkening and eyelid redness. In smaller print under a picture describes an even more disturbing side effect of the product: "brown pigmentation of the colored part of the eye which is likely to be permanent" and "hair growth to occur in other areas of the skin. " The smaller font under the the heading "Special warnings associated with Latisse use." Additionally, there is a separate PDF file that outlines even more information about the product. The website also contains a historical timeline of the "evolution of lash enhancers" that they begin in 4000 BC when men and women of Egypt used makeup to eventuate their eyes. In the 1800's, the development of Mascara occurs and there is even a section about the popularity of photography and compact mirrors. The website is comparing their product to harmless makeup to try and downplay the serious medical nature of the drug. They are also making note of the social pressures that women face when they mention the development of photography. Essentially Latisse is telling readers that it is because of photography and media images that women need to use their product.

Check the website out for yourself.

http://www.latisse.com/Default.aspx?return=true

2009-12-08T14:22:00.000-08:00

While watching television this morning I saw a commercial for WebMD, the American corporation that is believed to provide health information services to the public. The commercial promoted a “heath check” for depression. It went further to recommend that if the viewer had any “feelings of sadness” he or she should visit the website to answer a few questions to “easily and discreetly assess your symptoms, treatments, lifestyle, and medical history”. The commercial did a good job of making it sound like we all should go to the website as the symptoms described were very vague. Individuals are no longer persuaded to ask doctors for help. The creation of websites like WebMD make it seem as though doctors aren’t even needed for a diagnosis. Such websites give individuals another means to answer health questions or problems. Could this possibly have to do with how expensive doctor visits are? Or how hard it is to even get an appointment with doctors?

Through a variety of multiple choice questions the individual can determine what is wrong with us on the WebMD website. The slogan for the website is “Better Information. Better Health”. However, I have used this website many times in the past few years and my sore throat has been diagnosed as the Black plague on more than one occasion, but I’m still here today. So either I’m really strong and have a great immune system or WebMD isn’t as good as it says it is.

http://www.webmd.com/

RED, Pink, and Conflicts of Interest

2009-12-08T12:23:00.001-08:00

In Chapter 9 of “Practices of Looking,” Sturken and Cartwright mention different ways that corporate marketing and advertising can help to generate consumer health awareness and also promote charity venues. The chapter explains that the charity benefits from donations and exposure, the corporation benefits from their image of benevolence, and the consumer benefits from the good feeling of supporting an important cause. Previously this year, I posted a link to the blog about something I found very interesting, the branding of different diseases by companies. I would argue that the endorsement of different health problems by companies is not only to generate consumer awareness for health issues, but also to capitalize on consumers and gain large amounts of profit.

This made me think of the RED organization, which nine major companies are associated with in order to help donate money to the AIDS cause in Africa. The RED organization is an easy and effective way to donate and help a cause, and consumers can feel good about buying a RED product knowing that some of the proceeds get donated. RED is perfect because the money spent for merchandise you would buy anyway is going to a cause with no extra effort by the customer, as long as the customer chooses to buy a RED product rather than another. In this case, if both of the products were the same and one product donated a portion of the cost to AIDS, I would bet that the consumer would choose the one that supported the cause, as a simple way to feel they are contributing. Integrating a donation system within certain brands and consequently capitalizing off of it raises a moral question, that although it is great that the RED campaign is raising funds for AIDS, is it okay for them to also earn a profit while doing so?

Clearly, the RED organization knows how consumers operate, and are taking advantage of that in these campaigns. However, RED has become a look and a socially conscious trend and fashion statement, especially with GAP’s RED T-shirts and endorsements by celebrities, most notably Bono. Therefore, using this form of corporate marketing has become very beneficial for the companies involved in the RED campaign. Situations like this continue to be debated; when corporations endorse a cause in order to gain a profit, and the public is unsure of where, exactly, the money is going. This most frequently happens with Breast Cancer, where products with pink ribbons on them tend to sell more than others, but the corporations cap their donation to the cause at a certain amount, despite the people who continue to buy the product assuming that they are contributing to the cause. Granted, this debate escalates when focusing on the ties between the private corporate interests of pharmaceutical companies in relation to the business of health and national healthcare, and the debate continues today.

Cialis: Spoofs and Side Effects

2009-12-07T20:23:00.001-08:00

When we were talking in class today about how many pharmaceutical ads relate to sex, I immediately thought of the Viagra and Cialis commercials that I always see late at night when I’m up watching trashy VH1 shows or something similar (Tool Academy, anyone?). I also thought of this mock Cialis commercial that I stumbled upon a while ago, in which Cuba Gooding, Jr. acts as a man who no longer suffers from erectile dysfunction after taking 36-hour Cialis.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1833992/cialis_commercial/

I thought the video was funny because of how outrageous it is in its portrayal of the effects of the drug. But I also noticed something this time around that I hadn’t noticed when I viewed this video initially. We had talked in class about how oftentimes in pharmaceutical advertisements when the side effects are being mentioned, the on-screen images will portray happiness and excitement and fun in order to distract from the harsh and off-putting words and diseases being mentioned in the background narration. This video expertly satirizes that practice. In fact, I remember that when I watched this video for the first time, I was so taken aback by the ridiculousness nature of it that I barely listened to the voiceover; it was the same generic sounding man I had heard on countless other commercials.

This time, I paid more attention to the combination of images and words. When the narrator spoke of the side effects, which “may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache,” the images on the screen were of a happy couple cuddling in bed oblivious to the erection pitching their sheets up and then that same couple driving through with his erection guiding the steering wheel. These images are so absurd that the entire focus of the audience goes toward them, not the dangerous side effects or other information that is offered about the product. Although this commercial is clearly a parody of Cialis ads, it is interesting as it sheds light on some of the tactics used by pharmaceutical companies in their advertising.

“One Less” but you may also get fever, dizziness, or nausea!

2009-12-07T11:11:00.000-08:00

As we discussed in class this week from Practices of Looking, the term “visual culture” encompasses a wide range of forms from fine art to films and television to advertising to visual data from science, law, and medicine. Scientific looking is not isolated from cultural contexts but rather, it is filled with ideologies and cultural meaning (we can’t get away from those ideologies, can we?).

Since the 90s, the United States has allowed direct-to-consumer advertising for prescription drugs, allowing consumer-patients to receive information about medicine choices. Even though these consumer-patients cannot purchase such as drug without a doctor’s prescription, pharmaceutical companies market their drugs through direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising tactics (“ask your doctor about…”). Many of these ads offer abstract promises such as being more fulfilled, normal, happier, etc, through the use of images of people in post treatment states of being. Simultaneously, however, by law, these print ads and TV commercials are required to discuss the conditions and potential negative side effects the drug can produce. They will often try to do this as subtly as possible via fine print on print ads and verbally racing through them (listen out for the chipmunk squeal) at the end of the commercials.

On such advertising campaign that really lends to this topic is for Gardasil. In November 2006, Merck & Co., Inc. announced the launch of a national print, television, and online advertising campaign for the world’s first cervical cancer vaccine. Adding to Merck’s ongoing cervical cancer and HPV education efforts, the campaign, called One Less, encourages females who are eligible for the vaccine to begin their vaccination series and to also continue to see their doctor for regular healthcare and screening. To inform and encourage these girls and women, the campaign focuses on a strong and positive message that is designed to empower them to want to become (or help their daughters want to become) “one less” person who will battle cervical cancer.

The campaign also focuses on important information about the vaccine not being about to fully protect everyone and not being able to prevent all types of cervical cancer. In each of their ads, they always address that ongoing cervical cancer screenings are important. They also add that Gardasil is not for use in pregnant women and will not treat cervical cancer. Maybe just as popular as their tag line “one less” is their rant that “Gardasil can cause injection site-pain, swelling, itching and redness as well as fever, dizziness or nausea.” I can practically say that by-heart now.

Before it's in Fashion, it's in Vogue

2009-12-06T19:57:00.000-08:00

Does this look like the Oprah you know?!?! Certainly not, and even in 1998 when this photo was taken, this isn't what she really looked like. Make no mistake - I love me some Oprah, but this Vogue cover seems a bit contradictory to what she has been telling everyone for years. A big part of her mantra is that beauty come from within people, and being yourself and not succumbing to the world's pressures is what makes a strong person blah blah blah. When she was approached to do the cover of Vogue, of course she was ecstatic as anybody would be, but it was a conditional offer. Anna Wintour, Vogue's universally hated editor-in-chief "suggested" that Oprah lose 30 pounds to "look her best" for the shoot, and when Anna Wintour "suggests" something, it generally means that it should be done. Not now, but right now. So Oprah put away the cookies for a couple months and hit the gym hard, but what does this really say about a) Oprah and her values and b) the influence something like a magazine can have over the wealthiest woman in the world?

First of all, let's just take a second to look at this photo. It's Oprah, on a lawn chair in some beautifully grassy hillside in a sasafrass black dress with sex hair saying "come and get me, boys" with her eyes and airbrushed jawline. Did you ever think you would see a sexualized image of Oprah Winfrey? This is the same woman who hosted a one-hour special show solely about poop. The media issues here go both ways. First, how can we, as a culture, be so obsessed with Oprah that we look to her to be on a high fashion magazine? And secondly, what power does Vogue have in our daily lives to convince even Oprah that her status will be elevated by being on the cover?

Even after this critique, I still love her show. And look at those guns!

I am African

2009-12-05T00:46:00.001-08:00

The "I am African" campaign that we touched upon briefly in class on Wednesday fascinates me. Upon googling it, I found out that the campaign is part of Keep A Child Alive. While this is certainly a great cause, I have some problems with the campaign itself. First as Song already mentioned, the people in the ad are wearing "tribal" war paint which exoticizes Africa and the idea of "Africanness". The beaded jewelry that many of the celebrities in the ads are wearing is also meant to create this sense of "Africanness" when in reality, beaded jewelry comes from all over the world, much like the bright woven cloth that Mercer refers to in the article we read for Wednesday. Like the Benetton ads that Mercer cites, this ad is meant to create a sense of diversity and togetherness when all it does is stifle any real dialogue about the issues that Africans face. This ad is playing on diversity and a sense of interconnectedness in order to draw attention to their cause. The ad seems seems to me to detract from the cause since it doesn't really open up dialogue. Since I had no idea what the ad was for, I focused on the celebrities rather than the cause. Diversity and Africa in this instance seem to be marketing ploys.

Joseph Lister and the myth of 'chronic halitosis'

2009-12-04T21:00:00.000-08:00

If you want to kill bad breath causing germs, you use Listerine. It's been around forever and it's in practically every medicine cabinet. If something says that it's 99.9% effective, and that 9 out of 10 doctors use it and recommend it, then it just has to be the best. Well, not so much. This wintry-green, tonsil burning potion that we gargle every morning was actually used (in an extremely distilled form) as floor cleaner and a gonorrhea remedy. But it wasn't a terribly revenue-generating product until the 1920's, when according to Steve Levitt's and Stephen J. Dubner's pop culture and economics book "Freakonomics,"

it was pitched as a solution to 'chronic halitosis,' the faux medical term that the Listerine advertising group created in 1921 to describe bad breath. By creating a 'medical condition' for which consumers now felt they needed a cure, Listerine created the market for their mouthwash. Until that time, bad breath was not conventionally considered catastrophe, but Listerine's ad campaign changed that. As the advertising scholar James B. Twitchell writes, 'Listerine did not make mouthwash as much as it made halitosis.' Listerine's new ads featured forlorn young women and men, eager for marriage but turned off by their mate's rotten breath. 'Can I be happy with him in spite of that?' one maiden asked herself. In just seven years, the company's revenues rose from $115,000 to more than $8 million.

It's weird to think about not caring about how one's breath smells. We have after coffee mints, after dinner mints, mint spray, mint strips, mint gum and so forth. There's a multibillion dollar industry solely based on the premise that society's breath should smell like a type of herb. And why mint? What is so great about mint? It's actually a pretty intense flavor and scent. It's fascinating that the terms 'mint' and 'fresh' have become synonymous, and that over the last hundred years we have not only grown accustomed to the smell of "fresh" a.k.a. "minty" breath, but also expect it, and if one doesn't have it, not only is their breath foul but we usually consider that person to be foul, unkempt, and dirty. How many times have you seen a cheesy guy in a sitcom do a "spritz, spritz" of breath spray before walking up to a hot girl?
Similar to soap, we don't actually need Listerine, medically. It doesn't kill germs that create halitosis, because there is no such thing as halitosis. Halitosis is human breath, repackaged as something that could ruin a marriage according to Listerine's first ads. In the case of Listerine's ad campaign which drove sales through the roof, the advertisers relied on the use of fear to sell their product. One of our supposed biggest fears is to end up as old maids or spinsters destined to die alone. However, if our breath is fresh that's one less reason for our mates to leave us, and we can live happily ever after.

White is Beautiful ( or that is what we are told to believe)

2009-12-04T20:59:00.000-08:00

This week in class we discussed how dirtiness is associated with people of other races and ethnicities. Our society is obsessed with cleanliness and often this cleanliness is equal to whiteness. When we see commercials telling us to give money to orphans in Africa, it always shows them lying in garbage and it mentions how these people can’t even bathe in clean water. Slumdog Millionaire provoked emotions in the audience by showing young children sleeping in garbage. Apparently, the worst state of life is not being able to bathe or have pure water. The advertising industry plays off this all the time from advertising bottled water that comes from the fresh streams of Fiji, to the new soap that doesn’t leave soap scum on your body, or simply the new products for making sure all the germs come off your counter tops. These commercials usually portray Caucasian, middle to upper class women who enjoy bathing, or cleaning because of such a great new products. How often do we see cleaning products advertised with minorities as the demonstrators?

While looking into this subject, I cam across a website dedicated to posting advertisements which are considered controversial, but nevertheless had been produced to advertise products we have all seen in the stores. The one I am posting on this blog shows an Indian women and an Indian man, who we find out is a celebrity, who are obviously in love. For some reason they split and years later she sees him on the cover of a magazine with another women, who is Caucasian. Then she sees him on the street with his new girl friend and their eyes meet, but he doesn’t go back to talk with her. The camera then shows her looking at a TV with an advertisement. This advertisement is for a Ponds product. This advertisement was for a product that they claimed contained some sort of chemical to produce a glowing white, pink color in ones skin. So the message is that she could maybe get him back if she changed the color of her skin to appear Caucasian. Even though this isn’t advertising soap it still has to do with one’s hygiene. The fact that this advertisement was actually produced in England in today’s times is disgusting. Not to mention the fact that England has a huge Indian population. I also find it interesting how the people they use to portray the Indian people in the commercial aren’t even dark skinned to begin with. If you think about our entertainment industry only a few people, become famous with dark skin. Most of the African American women who are famous have very Caucasian features, with extremely light skin. A couple examples of these women are Halley Barry and Tyro Banks.

Even in India the people who are famous for their roles in movies and as singers, are of lighter skin. I find it strange that this commercial is advertising a product for lighter skin when the female already has light skin. I guess in the end they still want to appeal to the public and they think by showing beautiful, light-skinned, women people are more inclined to associate their product with beauty. I don’t agree with this, but perhaps beauty products sell better if a beautiful light skinned female or male is advertising a beauty product? In the end the company is out to make money.

Here is a blatant example of a beauty product reflecting the dominant ideology that raises whiteness to the top of all other races. To be clean is to be white; to be dark is to be dirty. As a result one must change their appearance or adapt some attribute of the idealized Caucasian person to rise above their lower position. Lifestyle is also connected to cleanliness and in turn whiteness. An upper middle class housewife must have everything clean, which is why this character is portrayed in commercials for cleaning products. Or in this case an upper class Indian women must use this beauty product in order to be whiter.

http://www.cracked.com/article/182_8-racist-ads-you-wont-believe-are-from-last-few-years/

Diasporic Characters in Film and Television

2009-12-04T20:40:00.000-08:00

During this week’s classes, we discussed the diasporic themes found in hip hop music and the issues embedded in postcolonial media. However, what stuck me this week was the mention of how the fairly generic image of the “Bubbles,” the baby girl with the bubbles floating up from the washing basin became exclusively synonymous with Pears Soap. I began to wonder which other images have become so prominently associated with a particular brand. Though the three circle silhouette of Mickey Mouse’s head is instantly recognizable, it is by no means generic and neither are other brand manufactured symbols like it. However, one image did occur to me. The rough collie’s association with the protagonist of Eric Knight’s novel “Lassie Come Home” ever since it debuted in 1943.

Furthermore, as recently as the 2005 version of "Lassie Come Home," the Lassie franchise has been revived multiple times while other animal based ones have faded into memory. Why does the character of Lassie endure?

I believe it is due to the nature of basic story of Lassie. A Depression era Yorkshire family, suffering from financial difficulties, is forced to sell their son’s beloved collie to a Scottish duke. Despondent and homesick, the collie is freed from her new home by the duke’s kind niece Lassie then embarks on a perilous journey across the English countryside to be reunited with her family. At its heart, “Lassie Come Home” is the tale of a diaspora. The circumstances that force her family to sell her are not unlike those felt by the thousands of people that were driven from Europe during times of hardship, particularly during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Her journey back home echoes the desires of those who left behind family members in their homeland, and hoped to one day be able to return and reconnect with their kin.

Today, the image of Lassie has transformed in the popular consciousness to be a rescue dog that saves Timmy from the well, but at the heart of every incarnation of the character is the theme that she always wishes to return home to her beloved master. It is the belief that one will face great dangers to return to one’s family that keeps the character of Lassie in the public’s consciousness and it is a story that is revisited again and again in books and movies featuring both human and animal protagonists.

"Good Hair" : Images of African-Americans in the Media

2009-12-04T19:57:00.000-08:00

I recently watched Chris Rock's film Good Hair, and realized that the concept of what is considered "beautiful hair" relates to our discussion with cleanliness.

Cleanliness implies a controlled situation, which usually puts citizens of the industrialized world at ease. Similarly, calm, "relaxed" hair puts those interacting with an African-American woman at ease. They are able to consider her an "equal" because she does not have typical African hair.

This ridiculous notion is being fought by indie-media, but is still prevalent in mainstream media.

The above advertisement tells us that straight hair is beautiful hair. It is entirely probable that the hair of both these women is completely different in texture, but they are discouraged from embracing it because there new, straight hair allegedly makes them beautiful in the eyes of society.

Advertising media throughout history is fraught with ideas that encourage men and women to conform to the American societal ideal (which is, unfortunately, more often than not, the image of a white American). The differences between the races are completely disregarded, and everyone strives to look the same. Instead of emphasizing what makes each of us unique and beautiful, we all mask our differences to conform. Women of color, especially, are seen as wild, and as objects to be tamed, as is evident in the advertisement below:

She is wearing animal print clothing, and is in a position of vulnerability, inviting the viewer to "fix" her. It is important to note her hair: It is not "good hair", and therefore aims to disturb the viewer.

Such images of overt "African-ness" do not put viewers at ease, and therefore are not seen as prominently in the media. The following Chris Rock quote from Good Hair serves as a testament to just how far contemporary society still has to go in terms of tolerance and racial equality: "Good hair is white hair."

Slimming Seaweed Soap

2009-12-04T18:36:00.001-08:00

As we have discussed in class there was this newly found obsession with hygiene. Importance of hygiene goes hand in hand with a stressed importance of outer beauty, and in this day and age that also stresses peoples weight. Americans buy into all these ways of losing weight, wether it be diet pills, cellulite creams, or hundred calorie packs, we do it all. But, the most absurd in my mind is the fact that we would believe in a "slimmig soap". Their key slogan is "lathering up for a meltdown" in which they are refering to fatty cells that supposedly go away with the use of this product, and "cleansing outside and reducing fat inside" . I am biased since I have never put this soap to the test, but I'd say that the odds are in my favor.

Fabri Fibra- Italian Hip Hop

2009-12-04T18:04:00.000-08:00

During our conversation the other day about hip hop and its international reach, I immediately was reminded of the popular Italian rapper Fabri Fibra. Many of his videos and songs look and feel like "American rap music". It is obvious that Fabri Fibra is influenced by American hip hop music and it serves to suggest that hip hop can be an outlet of expression for not only cultures that have experienced some sort of diaspora, but also as an outlet to react to particular political and social movements. In Fabri Fibra's song In Italia, he exposes and criticizes the corruption of the Italian government, the prevalence of the mafia, and the often false religiosity of Italians. I've included the link to the video below and a translation of the lyrics so that you may get a better idea of the songs message. I also encourage you to check out some of his other videos that are on YouTube (Bugiardo, Speak English, La Soluzione are also great examples).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORDWGRlVLJE

lyrics:

There are things nobody will tell you
There are things nobody will give you
You were born and you died here,
you were born and you died here.
Born in the Land of half-truths.

Where do you run away?

In Italy, guns in the cars.
In Italy, Machiavelli and Foscolo.
In Italy, world champions.

I'm in Italy
Welcome

In Italy, go on holiday to the seaside.
In Italy, it's better not to get surgeries.
In Italy, don't go to the hospital.
In Italy, life is beautiful.
In Italy, parties and gala nights.
In Italy, you make deals with the underworld/mafia.
In Italy, your neighbor will shoot you.
In Italy...

There are things nobody will tell you
There are things nobody will give you
You were born and you died here,
you were born and you died here.
Born in the Land of half-truths.

Where do you run away?

In Italy, there is the real Mafia
In Italy the most dangerous are,
In Italy the hookers.
In Italy you eat home-made pasta,
In Italy burglars enter your house,
In Italy you can't find a job,
in Italy, but you kiss the Crucifix.
In Italy the monuments,
In Italy churches with paintings,
In Italy people with feelings,
In Italy countryside and kidnappings

There are things nobody will tell you
There are things nobody will give you
You were born and you died here,
you were born and you died here.
Born in the Land of half-truths.

Where do you run away?

In Italy, dating girls,
In Italy photographed pin-ups,

In Italy the blackmailed top models,
In Italy you learn Art,
In Italy the fortune-tellers/gypsies,
In Italy murderers are never caught,
In Italy lost faces and sure votes.

In Italy

There are things nobody will tell you
There are things nobody will give you
You were born and you died here,
you were born and you died here.
Born in the Land of half-truths.

2009-12-04T17:22:00.000-08:00

The new commercial for downy fabric softener, entitled Downy Simple Pleasures, allows the consumer to “feel more expressive with luxurious scents” that are “designed for every side of you”. Cleanliness has gone to a new level of personalization, where the different smells can now represent your different moods: allure, “a sweet and mysterious scent”, bliss, “a warm, sweet scent”, radiance, “the cool, watery scent”, serenity, “the soft and soothing scent” and dare, “a rich, dynamic scent”.

It seems as though cleanliness has taken on a new purpose of expressing one’s identity. The commercial discusses the various scents to express “every woman’s different sides”. The commercial goes further to state that the consumer, clearly directed to the female consumer, will feel more enhanced in certain feelings: “Feel more calm with downy serenity, feel more daring with downy dare, feel more elegant with downy allure… feel more”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0e5SGb5GFE

http://www.downy.com/en-US/product-line/simple-pleasures.jspx

So this is just weird.. Charmin's Free Bathroom in Times Square?

2009-12-04T16:47:00.000-08:00

Talk about Commodity fetishism!

An article: Charmin Makes Bathroom Break Social

This is their blog: http://charminenjoythego.blogspot.com/

Portable!

2009-12-04T16:32:00.001-08:00

In class this week, and previous weeks before, we have discussed our nation's obsession with cleanliness. In particular, the product Purell makes is quite popular in our culture. Of course it is necessary to wash our hands and keep them clean, but as we have pointed out, it has become quite out of control today. The image above is Purell's portable hand sanitizer you can attach on your purse, back pack strap, or key chain. I came across these in person multiple times because of friends of mine who own them. Apparently it is not enough to just have access to hand sanitizers in every floor of every building, but to also have it on you all day, everyday. Those germs will never get us now! Right?

The Dangers of Consumerism

2009-12-04T16:28:00.000-08:00

When I read Anne McClintock's article I was reminded a lot of the film Wall-E as she discussed the rise of consumerism. As she described on page 507, during the 18th century, "middle-class domestic space became crammed as never before with furniture, clocks, mirrors, paintings, stuffed animals, ornaments, guns and myriad gewgaws and knick nacks" (507). In the Pixar film, the world becomes so overconsumed with this type of consumption, that eventually the earth becomes inhabitable and people have to live in space ships, where ironically, consumption still reigns supreme despite causing the end of civilization. Rather than change their consumer habits, society just moved their habits to space.
When I was thinking of the negative effects that consumption had in the film, I began to think how the world has definitely began to see the negative impact of consumerism, especially with how it has been affecting the environment. Thus, I feel a big result of the consumer society in the past, is the notion of going green today. But ironically, just as in the film, we as a society are not changing our consumer tendencies. Rather, we are using this notion of "going green" to justify consumerism, which in turn, continues to hurt our planet.
For instance, rather than slow down production of SUVs, today, you can buy "hybrid" SUVs. These cars still use a lot of gas, but they are "green," so people assume that they are automatically doing good by the environment when they buy them. In reality, green or not, cars continue to eat away at the finite resource of oil. Likewise, when you go into a store, everything from household cleaners to clothes are "certified green" so we buy them to help the environment. In reality, we are still contributing to environmental harm every time we give into consumerist tendencies to buy, buy, buy, because we are still creating excess. A person may buy a bottle of water that is green "because it uses less plastic," but at the end of the day, many people who buy these bottles of water, don't even recycle them. Rather, they are too lazy and throw them in the trash instead. Thus, they bought the product to "help" the environment, but ended up hurting the environment anyway.
While "going green" in essence should be anti-consumerism, it has thrived based off of the consumer society and this can be a dangerous thing as shown by the film Wall-E where consumer society destroyed the world.

Clean in America

2009-12-04T14:04:00.000-08:00

This week in class we talked a lot about Soap and that America is obsessed with the idea about being clean and sterile. Today in our world, everything is made of steal or plastic so that germs do not get on the products we use everyday. But as we talked about Soap I found it interesting that New York City, the biggest City in America is extremely dirty. When we walk down the streets of New York there is trash everywhere and it is definitely no the cleanest place. Foreigner's who usually come to New York to view America may think this is what our nation is composed of. We may stress cleanliness but in reality the streets of our country are dirty and it smells really bad as well. The subway system is terrible also. In countries like Japan and Korea the subway system is highly maintained, clean, and is presentable to the public. If a Korean came to New York and rode the subway's here they would consider the U.S. the supreme nation to be a cheap nation that cannot afford their citizens with a nice subway system.
If you really look into American's are not really clean. We impose and act like we are but if you really look into the realities we are not clean.

BioPower: Mascots on Diets

2009-12-04T13:54:00.000-08:00

When I think of raisins, I think of the ultimate healthy snack. I remember recycling dozens of mini cardboard boxes at the preschool I worked everyday. This is what we give the kiddies to help them grow up big and strong.

So when I saw an article questioning Sun Maid Raisin Company's decision to slim down their mascot, I knew right then and there this was one of those biopower issues Foucault talks about. Just like the soap ADs in the McClintock piece, Sun Maid is perpetuating an image the state wants to maintain. Looks like the Sun Maid girl was put on a diet. She is no longer than full figured homely girl we remember. Instead, the state wants people to believe that skinny=healthy. No more fat people in America!

Spoken Word

2009-12-04T09:27:00.000-08:00

Monday's discussion about Lipsitz's article on hip hop and post-colonialism reminded me of the development of "spoken word." Spoken word is a form of poetry that is written with the intention of being performed which emerged from the Postmodern Art Movement in the 1980s. It actually developed predominantly here in New York in small poetry cafes. Similar to in hip hop music, the subject of spoken word poetry can vary greatly. Oftentimes it is used to make important statements regarding political agenda, social and cultural oppression, empowerment and protestation. Also like hip hop, spoken word takes a place in social and political movements from a cultural perspective, using the power of the human voice to influence and move others to action. Because of its prevalence in the African American community, many spoken word performances celebrate the history of black Americans and raise awareness of the African diaspora. In particular a piece that reminds me of the "diasporic intimacy" addressed in the article is Julian Curry's Def Poetry Jam performance "Niggers, Niggas and Niggaz" which speaks powerfully to the transformation of the word "nigger" from a derogatory term for slaves to casual slang used by youth across America today. I posted the link below to give an example of another form of artistic movement adjacent to hip hop that lends the power of voice and performance to economically marginal societies.

"Niggers, Niggas and Niggaz" - Julian Curry

Lipsitz article continued

2009-12-04T09:06:00.000-08:00

There is a quote in the Lipsitz article that I think is worth considering further: "the reach and scope of commercial mass media unite populations that had previously been divided." This follows an explanation of how free market economics have not brought widespread prosperity and freedom, but rather significantly widened the gap between the wealthy and poor. What Lipsitz seems to be saying is that as the class gap widens, the culture gap narrows. This is especially applicable to hip-hop - its biggest consumers are upper-middle class white kids, members of an economic class far removed from that out of which hip-hop originated. The idea of the culture gap narrowing as the class gap widens is applicable across all media platforms. Television fills the gap of the disappearing middle class, with shows about suburbia and nuclear families. Such programs are viewed by people spanning the class spectrum - from low-income to six-figure salary.

Lipsitz goes on to say that "post-colonial culture expressions...They foreground questions of cultural and social identity, rather than direct struggles for political power. They are pragmatic, immediate, and non-ideological, seeking to change life but putting forth no single blue-print for the future" (509). Though Lipsitz was not referring explicitly to hip-hop, but rather making a broad statement intended to encompass all post-colonial culture expressions, his statement speaks directly to rap. Hip-hop artists constantly talk about getting out of the ghetto, how they have come up through music and now have all the material possessions they could never before afford. What they don't often talk about is how to fix the problem of poverty, or how to get everyone out of the ghetto - or in Lipsitz' terms, "put forth no single blue-print for the future." J.Cole, an up-and-coming rapper who recently signed to Jay-Z's Roc Nation, sums up Lipsitz' work perfectly in his song "I Get Up":

"for all my niggas doin' time man up in prison

thought you had to resort to crime man fuck the system

we raisin' babies up in haiti where it ain't no hope

ain't no fathers dont take no scholarship to slang no dope

politicians hollerin' bout problems but I ain't gon' vote

he talk bout change still we floatin' in the same ol' boat

so tell me how I'm supposed to feel when the president spoke

when he ain't never had to struggle ain't never been broke

ain't even roll through the ghetto aint neva been close

trustin' this government like trustin the devil in oath

for rebel in coast i get up

life style of the young black and reckless

a generation of niggas strapped and askin questions..."

This verse is particularly poignant because Cole also describes the hegemony and power relationship between the government and the hip-hop community. This relationship is what inspired the genre, and this verse shows that it still fuels it.

New approach to soap and hygiene

2009-12-04T07:37:00.000-08:00

Last class we discussed the approach companies used when trying to promote soap. This got me thinking about the ways advertisers currently try to pitch hygiene to customers. Now I feel like advertisers have resorted to sexuality or sexual references when promoting their products. One example of this is the Herbal Essences shampoo and their commercials. Most of you, probably have seen at least one of the commercials and its clear that there is a sexual reference attached to their pitch. What is interesting about this is the fact that the product has changed a lot (with new bottles, new fragrances, etc.) but the advertising campaign has remained the same. Another examples, although in a lighter scale, are the Gillete Venus commercials, which use words as fire and desire in their jingle to appeal to the sexuality you achieve when using their products. Lastly, all the commercials about fragrances (especially those created by famous celebrities or renown designers) use sexual appeal as the way to approach their customers.
What I find interesting about this is the fact that compared to Europe, America has always had a fascination with advertising hygiene and cleansing and when talking about sexuality in advertising European ads are clearly more explicit and have less taboos. Its interesting to see how now America is also trying to have a more sexual approach to advertising, not only in hygienic product (think back to the ads we saw in class for Tom Ford). A shift in the way hygiene and cleanliness is pitched to the customers may be either a way to break taboos, just another attempt at being similar or better than European culture, or a sign that our culture is becoming more sexual as each day passes.

It is interesting how now there has been a shift

Really Disturbing

2009-12-03T22:04:00.001-08:00

I know this doesn't have anything to do with what we are currently learning, but I felt the need to post this add because it was so disturbing to me.

While researching for another class, I came across this add. Its intended purpose is to bring awareness to global warming. We talked about how the media often promotes images for shock value, but in this case I can't understand why it was necessary to go this far. I am curious what all of you think about this advertisement. Do you think this is an effective commercial? I personally felt they could have made it more clear how the commercial relates to global warming. Even when they state a fact at the end relating to the weight of polar bears , it doesn't make since to me to relate it to global warming.

Just watch it!

http://www.nw32.com/news/nationworld/sns-viral-polar-bear-ad-story,0,5936630.htmlstory

Eco-friendly Products: The Contemporary Soap?

2009-12-03T20:43:00.001-08:00

In Soft-Soaping Empire: Imperial Racism and Commodity Advertising, Anne McClintock offers a social history of soap in 19th century Britain relating to commodities, capitalism, imperialism, and advertising. She explains that soap both created and sustained a commodity culture and the advertising created for it perpetuated ideologies of race, class, and gender. She asserts that in the 19th century, soap became “a new form of a new cultural system for representing social value” (507). When I was thinking about the link between hygiene and social prestige that McClintock contended in her article, I began to think about the contemporary relationship between eco-friendly cleaning products and status.

As we all know by now, the United States is obsessed with environmental friendly behavior, products, electricity, etc. In doing research on the topic, I even discovered a term coined “green marketing”, the marketing of products that are presumed to be environmentally safe. These goods and services, which are considered to inflict minimal or no harm on the environment, have become readily available in stores. Furthermore, to make consumers aware, environmentally friendly goods and services are often marked with eco-labels. As a result, many claim that environmental appeals are growing in number. Popular examples of this would be the Energy Star label, which now appears on 11,000 different companies’ models in 38 product categories, from washing machines and light bulbs to skyscrapers and homes.

In regards to soap and hygiene products, Seventh Generation, Inc. is a company that sells cleaning, paper, and personal care products. The company focuses on sustainability and the conservation of natural resources. It uses recycled and post-consumer materials in its packaging and biodegradable, phosphate and chlorine free ingredients in its products. Over Thanksgiving vacation, I was at Target picking up a few household-cleaning products for school, and I noticed that the Seventh Generation brand and it’s competitors were considerably more expensive than the store brand and even the other name brands. While protecting the environment is important to me, I would rather pay $6 for a few ounces of dishwasher detergent than $10 for that of the same size.

In thinking about the topic, it occurred to me that there is a certain “prestige” attached to buying these eco-friendly products. While they may be better for the environment, they are considerably more expensive, and as a result, in buying them, there is a certain status attached to their possession and ultimate use.

Gone Too Far and Intervention Shows

2009-12-03T19:21:00.000-08:00

After reading the previous post about the show The Hoarders, I thought of a show that I have been watching on MTV called Gone Too Far. It is an intervention show where teenagers families have signed them up so that they can talk with DJ AM and then stage an intervention. This show is very gripping and really sucks you in. It is also disgusting and makes me sick to watch sometimes as they put needles into their arms or look like they are going to pass out or OD. It is kind of sickening to me that this is entertainment, yet I have found myself caught up in watching it. I feel really badly for the families involved and I like to see a success story. I guess it is also probably entertaining because I have no idea what it is like to be strung out on all of those drugs, so it is a completely foreign thing for me to watch. But, after watching the show I am grossed about by their hygiene for one thing. They use dirty needles, never appear to be very clean, they have burn marks all over there clothes and sheets, they have scars and ruined veins. These people are obviously not taking care of themselves in the ways that imperialism has shown us is how we should be, clean. These people are so focused on drugs, that they don't have time to let imperialist thought or ideas about being clean and healthy get in their way. These ideas that have been forced into our minds don't exist in their heads for the most part. It is only when their family members step in and tell them how gross they look or how disgusting it is, that they may shape up and realize. It is just fascinating to me that this is entertainment on TV today. I am very guilty of watching it and I think it is horrible yet riveting. There are many other intervention shows on TV and it is all pretty disgusting and obviously is a very important life or death issue for many people. The fact that these people are on the brink of losing their battle to addiction makes the show more addicting which is sick in its own right, but it is also very rewarding to watch them succeed and overcome their addiction at least for a short period of time.

The Hoarders

2009-12-03T10:23:00.000-08:00

In class I mentioned my newest obsession with A&E's show The Hoarders which gives audiences a glimpse into the lives of obsessive hoarders. While the hoarders on the show are extreme, and are suffering from an actual psychological disorder the show helps to showcase our obsession with cleanliness. Those who are not clean and do not have a high priority on hygiene are classified as an "other." Our society is so obsessed with hygiene that their are actual government divisions in place to regulate it. On most of the episodes that I have seen, the hoarders are seeking help because they are about to be evicted or in severe cases where there are children involved they are about to loose their children to CPS. These people are able to forge such intense attachments with belongings, even trash that they refuse to clean or throw anything out. One boy refused to clean up his dog's hair because he feared that it would cause his dog to die faster. While our society classifies these people as disgusting but why? Yes sometimes the amount of trash is actually a safety hazard but if people want to live that way shouldn't it be their prerogative? We are only so obsessed with cleanliness because we have been programmed that way, is the importance of hygiene anything more then a facade?

Here is a clip of the Hoarders

http://www.aetv.com/hoarders/video/

Advertising on College Campuses

2009-12-02T23:16:00.000-08:00

I spent a couple of days over Thanksgiving break visiting friends and family in Austin. Walking around the University of Texas campus and to my friends’ apartments right off-campus, I was struck by the nature of the advertisements on billboards that I saw. We talked today in class about how Victorian advertising brought images of domesticity out of the private home and into the public sphere. The advertisements that I saw on UT’s campus were kind of surprising for a few different reasons. The first billboard I saw was for a nearby apartment complex. It depicted a shirtless guy with a girl in lingerie on top of him; the couple looked shocked at the camera, as if they had been walked in on and caught in the act. The slogan was something along the lines of “Because you need your own space for your own needs.” (When I came across this billboard, it was dark, so the picture didn’t come out well on my phone, and I never passed it again, unfortunately). I was first captivated by how something that is quite personal (hooking up with someone) was taken out of the private sphere and used as a technique to market a product. I was also intrigued by the hegemonic ideals present in this advertisement. Clearly leasing an apartment from this company would not correlate with one’s sexual activity, but advertisements such as these suggest that having your “own space” will make your “own needs” those of needing a place for hooking up.

There were a bunch of advertisements similar to this one, scattered all around the campus. I thought that said a lot about the UT student body. I have never really noticed billboards or lack thereof around our “campus,” but around UT, they all seem to send the message that whatever product is being advertised will lead to one’s getting laid. Below is the one picture I did get of a billboard I passed in the daytime. It’s an advertisement for an apartment complex directly off of UT’s campus, that says “It’s not a walk of shame if you’re walking home to The Quarters,” (The Quarters being the apartment complex). Again, the advertisement played up the presence of sex on campus and shows a pretty girl walking home after a presumably fun night. Obviously what will happen to you if you live at The Quarters…

Branding, Soap, & The Shampoo Isle

2009-12-01T17:54:00.000-08:00

Reading Anne McClintock’s “Soft-Soaping Empire” caused me to think about how far the branding of soap has come since Pears created his empire. In my Advertising and Society class, we often talk about brands and how we chose certain ones only because we identify with that particular brand. Brands play into our insecurities, just as manufacturers of soap did before it was popular. When we learned about this in my advertising class, I wrote about the most intimidating encounter with brands that I can think of: the shampoo isle in any store. Walking down that isle, it’s easy to feel like so many brand names and logos are calling out to you, but you have no idea which one to choose. Each different brand seems to promise pleasure, happiness, better health, etc. The different bottles and logos allow customers to identify them and distinguish them amongst each other, but there are so many options that I find the shampoo isle frightening.

Treseme, Revlon, Head & Shoulders, Dove, Aussie, Herbal Essence, Garnier Fructis, Redken, Paul Mitchell, Pantene Pro V, L’Oreal, John Frieda, Suave, Nexxus: all in different colorful bottles, shapes, and sizes, protecting against dryness, split ends, color damage, frizziness, and oil. The question is, how do people chose? Shopping in this isle is a prime example of the power of brands. Every single product essentially only washes and cleans hair, but each product promises this in a different way, on a different platform.

What’s interesting to me is that very rarely (I’d argue hardly ever) does a person pick up the bottle and turn it around to look at the different chemical ingredients on the back to compare different products. Instead, the customer looks at the logo on the front, recognizes the product, or reads the first few bold words on the front of what the product promises. Standing in the shampoo isle glancing at the logos, I often recall a catchy slogan (Treseme, Treseme, Oh la la!), remember a celebrity who endorsed the product (Eva Longoria’s flowing, shiny hair after using L’Oreal), or recall what the shampoo claimed to do in the commercials.

Once a customer is loyal to a certain brand and have one they like, the shampoo isle is less intimidating, because the person can simply identify that product’s logo, shape, and color, and pick it out. Still, the possibilities in that isle always seem to make me question my decision. What makes a person a Revlon user or a Suave user is definitely not the chemicals in the bottle. Instead, the customer is buying into the brand.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_BDcnsU9j1xY/SraKIhZizLI/AAAAAAAAAHY/ZcePwiomGCs/s400/shampoo.jpg

2009-11-27T14:13:00.000-08:00

I love this class and I realize what the purpose is, but sometimes we are too critical of the media. At some point we need to acknowledge that the media is changing for the better. Yes, the media is still full of stereotypical images, but it is impossible for stereotypes not to exist. The show, Will and Grace, presents two best friends and the male lead happens to be gay. The show isn't always about his sexual presence and he is a lawyer who happens to be gay. This image of gay man was widely accepted. The media industry then places a similar character in many other shows. Is the "Will" character another stereotype of homosexuals? It depends on how one defines stereotypes. It may have become one but, only because it has become another common image in the media. This is why stereotypes will continue to exist. As soon as the media industry latches on to a new type of character it becomes so common that it appears as another stereotype. Will and Jack represent two types of homosexuals. I have met gay guys just like the both of them, so they are not just stereotypes, but perhaps truthful portrayals of what some gay men are like. Someone in the class made a comment that stereotypes are present everyplace. The way a Latino person is portrayed and the way a Caucasian person is portrayed are both stereotypes. It is impossible to present every single type of person in the world, thus we are only able to get a small taste of different kinds of people through the media. Jack is a more common image in the media, but we must give credit to the media for making this image acceptable to the public. Would this image have been accepted 30 years ago?
We have to think about how we draw the line between stereotypes and valid representations of people. When do stereotypes not exist? These are two questions, which we must consider before being so quick to judge TV shows or films for attempting to slowly make a change, while keeping in mind economic interest. Will and Grace has done a good job at presenting more then one type of homosexual in order to demonstrate that a gay man may not always act as flamboyant as previously portrayed across the media.

Sexuality on MTV's The Real World

2009-11-22T17:46:00.000-08:00

This week’s discussion in class about homosexuality in the media made me think about the way in which homosexuality and sexuality in general have been depicted on MTV’s The Real World. In all twenty-two seasons that have aired since the show’s inception, there has always been a gay cast member to appear in the house. In doing some research on the topic, I discovered that The Real World was the first reality show to portray the life of a homosexual on national television. In 1992, during the first season of the show, the gay cast member’s coming out was first seen as a shock; however, as his fellow cast members and viewers at home got to know the gay male on a more personal level, they were able to relate to him as a person and not just single him out as “the homosexual”. The trend that The Real World has continued to use since its first season over seventeen years ago is to lure viewers into the lives of seven strangers, with each season bringing with it the promise of a new gay or lesbian character that the viewers will come to know.

While there are overt similarities and differences in the way homosexuality on the show has been portrayed, the portrayal has definitely evolved. During the third season in San Francisco airing in 1994, the show gained a lot of attention with cast member and AIDS activist Pedro Zamora. Zamora’s life was featured significantly, highlighting his character as someone living with AIDS. He was one of the first openly gay men with AIDS to be portrayed in popular media, and after his death on November 11, 1994 (mere hours after the final episode of his season aired), he was lauded by then-President Bill Clinton.

More recently, the twenty-first season of the show in Brooklyn, was the first season to include an openly transgender cast member. The show revealed that she first realized her gender variance in high school and began living as a woman at seventeen. She began her transition almost five years prior to moving into the Real World house and completed her gender reassignment surgery in Thailand in July 2008, only a few months before the season began filming.

While some seasons have featured the gay topic more heavily than others, it has always been a theme that has brewed conflict on the show.

'A-typical act of juvenile delinquency'

2009-11-22T16:47:00.001-08:00

Last week one of my roommates showed me and interview of a 10 year old boy,Will, that is refusing to stand up and join in the reciting of the pledge of allegiance. He is only in 5th grade but he is greatly troubled participating in the act until America lives up to ideals in the line of "liberty and justice for all". He claims to want to be a lawyer, therefore he analyzed what he was truly saying when reciting the pledge. He states that "gays and lesbians cant marry, there is still a lot of racism and sexism in the world". Will refuses to "swear" that gays and lesbians have the same rights that all heterosexuals do. Until he feels like the country is changing and there really is equality for all human beings he will sit down silently while the rest of the class stands to say it. When his teacher finally was fed-up with his behavior he told her"solemnly with a little bit of malice in my voice, ma'am with all do respect, you can go jump off a bridge". Of course this had repercussions and he wrote a letter apologizing, but it did add to the impact of his protest.

In doing this he has constantly been called gay himself by his peers at school, which he is not, but it seems that clearly in our society men, or in this case boys, aren't generally portrayed to support gay rights unless they are in fact gay themselves. He claims that this is so important to him because "I've grown up with a lot of people and I'm good friends with a lot of people that are gay". There is a sense of irony in this statement considering he is only 10 years old but with his flamboyant vocabulary and eloquence it is easy to respect him and understand that he genuinely believes in what he is standing up for.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZiBiJDLbmY

Disney in Shanghai

2009-11-21T15:56:00.001-08:00

In Chapter 10 of “Practices of Looking” Sturken & Cartwright explain the increase of global marketing in key American brands in recent years. Disney is an example of a company that is increasingly promoting itself globally, despite sometimes vast cultural differences between the company and the country in which it develops. Just a few weeks ago, it was confirmed that China’s planning agency approved plans for a Disney theme park in Shanghai, China’s biggest city.

Disney has been trying to expand their brand all over the world (and are often accused of forcing their products in international markets and thus contributing to homogenization), but originally had trouble with China because of the restrictions that the government enforces on the media throughout the country. Still, to lay the groundwork for approval, Disney had been exposing the Chinese population to Disney film, television, and products for years. Disney obviously wants to grow in China to capitalize on the large population and the economy in the country, and hopes to entice the population to frequent the parks

What I think is most interesting about this venture is that Disney represents American “social values” that differ greatly from those in China. Obviously, the rides and classic attractions will be slightly altered to fit Chinese culture, and they will most likely create new rides to incorporate Chinese stories and history. Still, Disney is considered a very “American” brand, and China if known for being very strict and strategic with what Western views can be exposed to Chinese culture. For example, only 20 non-Chinese films are allowed to be shown per year in China, and even those are often altered to make sure they fit governmental standards.

The NY Times explains that, “Throwing open its doors to such a uniquely American - and permanent - entertainment experience is a milestone for China, which has aggressively protected its culture from Westernization in general and Hollywood in particular.” This is a great example of a brand in corporate America becoming global and thus contributing to the global flow of visual culture on an international scheme.

Funny and Not So Funny

2009-11-20T21:01:00.000-08:00

In this commercial for Manix condoms, a young man and woman are having sex while intense classical music plays in the background. You see nothing but clothes flying from under the sheets onto the floor and exaggerated gymnastic movements. It's all laughs till, cut to: her pregnant and giving birth. Next thing you know she's walking with a baby stroller down the streets of Paris and sits on a bench, looking stressed and rocks the stroller. Enter stage left, an attractive young man holding a cigarette comes to her and ask for a light. He points to the baby as if to say "is it yours", she motions yes. Uninterested in her now that she's a mom, he runs off at the speed of light, frightened. At first first view this commercial is hilarious and seemingly open minded, but the moment it gets to this part I flipped my point of view. I recognized something wrong. Why did he run off? Because she has a baby, she's no longer attractive? The girl starts freaking out and makes strong jesters toward the child, violent, and then the clip goes in fast speed reverse.

So now part two: The girl is back in bed before the original act. The man comes to her and eager to get it on, now pause. Waving her hand at him she motions to back off and says "do you have a condom?" End clip. The logo and "You'll need them more than you think" scrolls across the screen.

What this says to me personally is...it's not about STD's or AIDS it's solely about pregnancy. First, if the woman doesn't ask the man to wear a condom he might not take the initiative--even though it's a huge risk, that will end in a difficult choice for the woman if it's unintended. Second, choosing to have the baby is her responsibility for her irresponsibility and she pays for this by no longer being desirable to other men.

Why did they show her with the baby? Why not showing her with the pain of choosing to keep the baby or not? Or perhaps her standing in an abortion clinic mortified, frightened, and sad. And the man absent, a message directed more to the men that says "this is no joke". Instead it's about her desirability to men and ultimately she regrets having a baby for this reason. This commercial has a lot of messages but the one that stands out for me is the denial of the woman, period. Having a baby is a beautiful miraculous thing no matter what. It says the unwed mother is bad in some way, and she will be punished for this primarily because she losses her appeal to men. Another sexist male gaze. This also sends a message to men that it's OK to abandon women because he is clearly not in the picture anymore.

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=35900700202

Grey's Anatomy and the Lesbian Gaze

2009-11-20T20:09:00.000-08:00

Referring to the Lewis article about the lesbian gaze, I think it's important to at least partially refute her argument by looking at the popular television show: Grey's Anatomy.

I felt that it was important to talk about lesbianism, as opposed to gay men, because they are woefully under-represented. Gay culture can be seen as a microcosm of the state of gender issues today: those of men are given much more importance than those of women. In short, it's becoming more acceptable to be a gay man than it is to be a gay woman.

Grey's Anatomy is one of my favorite shows, not just because of the great music, the excellent caste or the witty dialogue, but because of the way it represents people. They are shown as doctors, each with their own lives and issues to deal with; nowhere is the issue of race highlighted. Though it is obvious that the protagonists come from a variety of social and ethnic backgrounds, they are shown as human beings. This is why I wasn't surprised at the sensitivity with which Shonda Rhimes (the show's producer) handles the lone lesbian couple on the show.

They are not hyper-sexualized, they are not seen from a male's point of view, and yet they are among the more popular characters on the show. They have fun flirtatious moments, quirky conversations and relationship problems, just like the heterosexual couples on the show. In short, they are just another "normal" couple.

Through this remarkable display of forward thinking, Shonda Rhimes is helping bring lesbians into mainstream society and making them more "conventional".

The show does deal with the many difficulties that homosexual women deal with, even in today's "progressive" social setup. In addition to the usual "difficulties coming out to your parents", there are little scenes that allow me, as a heterosexual female, a glimpse of the everyday mundanities of being a lesbian that almost go unnoticed. One interesting such incident occurs when lesbianism is equated with divorce. In last night's episode of Grey's Anatomy, Callie Torres speaks with Miranda Bailey's father about cutting her some slack. Bailey did not tell her parents about her divorce, and when her father found out (when he surprised her with a visit), he told her that he was ashamed of her. Callie speaks with her father, and tells him that she is a lesbian, and that it took her parents awhile to deal with it, but they did. In this situation, being gay is equated with divorce. Though it is by no means the central theme of the episode, this conversation makes an overt statement about the fact that homosexuality is often seen as morally "wrong" and is equated with divorce, which is similarly frowned upon, especially in small-town America.

The scene is at 17:00 in the video below:

Palin on Oprah

2009-11-20T19:19:00.001-08:00

I recently watched Oprah's interview with Sarah Palin that aired a couple weeks ago, and it was pretty interesting to watch. Half the purpose of the interview was to promote her new book, but it also painted a very different picture of the Sarah Palin everybody got familiar during the 2008 election. This interview showed a complete opposite side of her, a side that had nothing to do with the whole "hockey mom" routine. Of course she mentioned how she loved her family, but it wasn't really about that. A big thing with Sarah Palin is the way she always talking about being a victim of the media, and how she always felt like they joined forces to paint a negative picture of her. Oprah, who is generally sympathetic to all her guests, gave her a fair, neutral place to say how she felt. I'm always intrigued by how much of what we see in an election is scripted and staged. In this case, she was totally unscripted, and I found myself drawn to her and actually liking her even though I fiercely disagree with most of what she stands for. Media and politics are two fields that usually go together like oil and water, and while I'm glad that I got to see another side of Palin, I'm even more confused now. I'm less and less sure which personality is fake. She could easily be a redneck hockey mom and just happened to tone it down for Oprah, but she could just as easily be a normal person, and put on the polarizing republican hat to attract voters. It just shows how that in the world of politics, the individual has so little say in how they are portrayed.

True Representations in "True Blood"

2009-11-20T19:03:00.000-08:00

Fans of the phenomenally popular HBO series “True Blood” may have literally saved Lafayette Reynolds’s neck. The fast talking, provocative, purple shadow wearing, and vampire blood dealing short order cook at Merlotte’s Bar and Grill, the fictional town Bon Temp’s local hangout, was doomed by author Charlaine Harris, whose Southern Vampire Series “True Blood is based on, in her second book, “Living Dead in Dallas.” However, Lafayette was spared his gruesome literary fate and his character will continue in the upcoming third season.

During this week’s class, we discussed how most representations of homosexual males on film and television share the following characteristics. They are white and are either affluent and rational or middle class (not rich but not without financial support) and flamboyant. They also tend to live in more liberal minded cities such as New York or San Francisco. Lafayette, on the other hand, is African American, lives in Louisiana, has rippling muscles, wears a mish mosh of male and female clothing, is rational yet speaks his mind no matter how taboo his sentiments are thought to be. And I have yet to read a single review of the show in which the writer expresses dislike towards him. On the contrary, many writers cite Lafayette as one of the primary reason why they enjoy the show which brings me to my question of how Lafayette has managed to break through so much of the red tape that the media has constructed concerning homosexual and African American characters.

Let’s begin by examining Lafayette’s character within the context of “True Blood.” Though Lafayette is no manner shy about his sexuality, the small town of Bon Temp accepts him as one their own regardless of his social deviance. I believe this acceptance is due to several major points. One, although Lafayette is gay, he is very muscular and in addition to being a cook, he is the town’s main drug dealer and works on the road crew with the main character, Sookie Stackhouse’s, alpha make brother, Jason. These aspects of Lafayette are traditionally associated with hegemonic portrayals of masculinity. Furthermore, Jason is the embodiment of the hegemonic male who rarely spends a night sleeping alone, and his friendship with Lafayette may lend the man to be accepted by Bon Temp’s other overly macho citizens.

Secondly, Lafayette is one of the most intelligent people in Bon Temp. He judges people by their actions rather than by their looks or rumors surrounding them. When a wake is held for Sookie’s grandmother, Lafayette advises Tara, Sookie’s best friend, to throw out the majority of the food brought by the gossiping neighbors. He says that the casseroles are filled with “bad juju” and that you can “taste the suspicion and hatred” in every bite. Later, when Sookie allows her boyfriend Bill, who also happens to be a vampire, to bite her and drink from her for the first time, the crowd in Merlotte’s is shocked and judgmental of her actions. Lafayette simply tells her not to worry about them, and that “it’s not possible to live unless you’re crossin’ somebody’s line somewhere.”

Thirdly, Lafayette is neither physically nor emotionally weak. He is completely secure with who he is and his way of living. When a rude patron at Merlotte’s sends a burger back, claiming that it has AIDS, Lafayette—who is not HIV positive—calmly brings the plate back over to the table and asks, “Who ordered the burger with AIDS?” The redneck man answers that he ordered a burger deluxe but with no AIDS. Lafayette explains that at Merlotte’s every burger comes with fries, a bun, tomato, lettuce, mayo, and AIDS then shoves the platter in the guy’s face, decks the guy's other two redneck buddies, and declares that if this person is going to order from his kitchen he is going to eat the food as it is served. As one final dig, Lafayette reminds that man to tip his waitress. It is hard to imagining either Will or Jack from “Will & Grace” behaving in that sort of manner.

Lastly, aside from Lafayette’s personality and actions, what may cause him to be more accessible than the other characters on “True Blood” is that while he is what is commonly perceived as a social deviant, he inhabits a world filled with people that normalize him by comparison. Sookie, the pretty young waitress is a telepath. Sam Merlotte, the bar owner, is a shape-shifter. Vampires are now recognized members of society and synthetic blood is served up at bars and restaurants across the country. Other members of the town are shameless bigots. In a world swirling with the unusual and unexplainable, Lafayette serves as a voice of reason and his own unique attributes as a black, gay, semi-flamboyant male are diluted by comparison.

Now the question is can a character like Lafayette only exist in a world such as is constructed by HBO’s “True Blood” or can he carry over into the primetime comedies and dramas found on basic cable?

Link to the "AIDS Burger Scene": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=890ULiSXZSY

Gender Blender

2009-11-20T18:32:00.000-08:00

An article titled "It's All a Blur to Them" from this Thursday's Style section of the New York Times, discusses the resurgence of androgynous-dressing men and women last seen in the 1970s. Although I think this "phenomenon" has been around for a while below 14th street, the Times claims that this time around it's the men who are digging through their mom's closets. Psychologist Diane Ehrensaft coined the term 'gender fluidity' to describe the idea that "younger people no longer accept the standard boxes. They won’t be bound by boys having to wear this or girls wearing that. I think there is a peer culture in which that kind of gender blurring is not only acceptable but cool.” The article continues and cites famous people who embody this image. Including Adam Lambert from American Idol, because he wears eyeliner, emo-rocker Pete Wentz and Johnny Depp. The author also notes how many couples seem to have similar, yet vaguely reversed styles such as the female in a relationship wearing a hoodie and a leather jacket and the male wearing a gauzy T-shirt and super-skinny pants. Although the Times makes some decent arguments, I think that as a whole there is a lot of misrepresentation in this piece. This isn't a new, it's Brooklyn.
For years you wouldn't be able to walk down a street south of 14th and not encounter male waifs sporting clothes that could have easily been worn by their girlfriends the night before. On a deeper level, the way in which young men adopt these 'feminine' styles that break gender boundaries are reminiscent of the methods used to put gays on television in the Shugart reading and the lesbian gaze in the Lewis reading. The fact that tight black jeans, and a long loose t-shirt worn by a man symbolizes femininity is a little problematic. It wasn't until the 1970's and '80s that it became permissible for women to wear pants in the work place. Up until that point, dresses and skirts signified femininity, and furthered the gender separation between women and men. Even though mens pants were never as tight as they are now, the "baggy" trend was seen as thuggish and inappropriate when it was very popular in the '90s. Furthermore, men have been wearing thin undershirts underneath their button-downs for decades. So really, this masculinized femininity style is original feminist style, both trying to rebel and prove women can be equal to men in all areas, repackaged as feminine style for androgynous males.

Your biological clock is ticking...

2009-11-20T18:24:00.000-08:00

I wish I could actually find the commercial I am writing about because it is so hilarious (but also scary). I'm sure you've all seen those First Response pregnancy test commercials... Well, I recently saw one and I was blown away by how perfectly it lended itself to the curriculum. The commercial featured three women asking questions about their pregnancy. One of the women asked "have I waited too long?" I know that some women are concerned with their biological clocks, but this woman was 25, maybe 30 at the oldest, so her wondering if she had waited too long to have kids was absurd. This commercial promoted the hegemonic ideal that all women want to get pregnant/have kids and it creates the sense that ALL women should be concerned with the fact that our biological clocks are ticking away. Equally as interesting was the fact that it played during an episode of Say Yes to the Dress (don't judge!!!), a show that gives viewers a glimpse into the inner workings of a bridal salon. It only makes sense that First Response would air their commercial during a time slot that is sure to attract lots of women frantic to get married and have babies. Other commercials that tend to air during this time slot are commercials for shopping and jewelry. No wonder there are so many bridezillas out there!

For Gentlemen Only

2009-11-20T17:44:00.000-08:00

Just recently Ketel One Vodka has expanded its ad campaign from the print ads to television commercials. The commercial revolves around a group of upper-middle class, white men who are supposed to represent “real” men. Other than the one woman sitting in the background of the scene, who seems very out of place, the entire commercial centers around men. Even the narrator attempts to promote a very deep masculine tone. The narrator states, “There was a time when substance was style. When men were unmoved by the constant current of the crowd. When they didn’t drink their vodka from delicately baited perfume bottles. There was a time when men were men. It was last night.” It appears that the commercial is attempting to promote connoisseurship of those individuals, who I guess have to be male, who go against the crowd and drink the right vodka. To be a true connoisseur one must distinguish between what is popular and what is truly good. However to know the difference you have to be a man’s man. In addition, the commercial states, “when men were men”. This clearly does not explain what sort of man, attributes, characteristics, etc, hence it is insinuating that if you have to ask you probably are not one of them.

I thought it was interesting how Ketel One was promoting its brand to one type of person. The commercial showed no variety and almost didn’t want to include anyone outside of the very narrow upper-middle class, white male, as consumers of the alcoholic beverage. This doesn’t really make sense to me because I would think that a company would want to appeal to as many people as possible. Wouldn’t companies want more people buying their products?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFj3FJlBT8Q&feature=player_embedded

New Moon double standard

2009-11-20T14:40:00.000-08:00

I went to the midnight showing of New Moon last night and as I was watching the film, and gauging the response of the audience, I thought of some interesting points to write about. Much of the hoopla surrounding the film has to do with Taylor Lautner who plays the character of Jacob Black in the series. Every teenage girl is swooning over him and his new body (Lautner had to gain thirty pounds and chisel a six pack in order to keep his role as the teen wolf). What I have also been noticing, however, is that adult women are just as infatuated with him. The majority of the audience last night was made up of college-aged women or older. Whistles and cheers ensued every time Lautner appeared shirtless in the film. But the creepy part is Lautner is just 17 years old. Many of my friends continued to remind me that it's "legal in Canada" but I still find it disturbing that so many older women are expressing their obsession with a boy who would be a senior in high school. It seems to be a double standard in many ways, since the public is outraged when young female celebrities are objectified. When Miley Cyrus (who is the same age as Lautner) or Vanessa Hudgens (who is 22) is caught in some scandalous photo the media has a field day judging the young stars. Nonetheless, I think it is safe to say most people would be unnerved if they knew of twenty-something year old men staring at Miley Cyrus. Yet, somehow it is acceptable for women of the same age group to gawk at Taylor Lautner. Why is it that young female celebrities are supposed to hold on to some naive innocence while young male stars aren’t held to that same standard? I think it has a lot to do with the hegemonic expectations of men and women. Women are supposed to be reserved and well behaved; men are supposed to be strong and rugged. In effect, men are allowed to get away with much more in the media’s eyes. But why is the audience allowed to sexualize the image of young male stars, but not young female stars? Cyrus and Lautner are both 17, yet there is no one protecting Lautner from the gaze of all of these adult female fans.

Tyra Responded!

2009-11-20T12:59:00.001-08:00

Here's an article retracing the whole controversy of Tyra dressing up her models as alternate races.

I had a problem with Tyra's decision like a lot of other news outlets, not for putting her models in blackface (although I argue that it has similar connotations) but because she failed to realize that race is not physical a physical indicator of culture. We are socialized into the identities we subscribe to and it is wrong to tell people that by putting on some makeup and some clothing that you could somehow portray a person of another color. She claims that being blacks excuses her from any form of racism, but racism is in a sense a reductionist understanding of the world. No, Tyra, you are not a racist, but you a certainly a reductionist. You're basically playing up the exoticism and otherness of different races. Stop using color to guide discussions about toleration, and start using humanity as a uniting force for cultural understanding.

I personally don't think she redeemed herself, at least from these quotes. I couldn't find the full episode yet, but I imagine it'll be up soon. What do you think? (I'll update this week!)

CHECK OUT A PREVIEW HERE!

The Amish as a Study in Self-Awareness

2009-11-20T12:21:00.000-08:00

To many, the Amish are a mystery. They shun modernity in the name of their religion, and isolate themselves from the temptations of the outside world by living in self-sufficient communities.

As I discovered in writing last week's paper, a little research yields a lot of information. I grew up in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, which is home to the country's third largest Amish population. That being said, I did come into the paper with some knowledge of their lifestyle and religious practices. The Amish tradition of Rumspringa, which translates to "running around" in Pennsylvania Dutch, is arguably the most studied aspect of Amish life and relates directly to the notion of self-awareness. At the core of the Amish Church is the belief that members should have the right to choose to be baptized. In the Christian Church, infants are baptized and thus are not able to chose their religious destiny. It was for this difference in belief that the Amish were persecuted in Europe and subsequently fled to America.

During Rumspringa, which begins at age 16, an Amish youth can experience the outside world - he or she can dress like non-Amish peers, drink, smoke, drive, party, engage in behavior otherwise considered sinful. This period can last for as long as it takes for the young person to decide if he or she wants to be baptized in the Amish Church and enter into a lifelong religious commitment. If an Amish youth decides not to join the Church, he or she is shunned by family and the Amish Community, and enters the modern world more or less alone. Though this is an abbreviated explanation of the practice of Rumspringa and the societal pressures on Amish youth, the point is clear: the Amish believe that by the age of 16, a person is self-aware enough to make arguably the most important decision of their lives.

Self-Awareness Among News Groups

2009-11-20T10:22:00.000-08:00

For a while now I have been following an ongoing conflict in Tanzania, regarding the murdering of albinos for the sale of their body parts. My investigation often leads me to international news broadcasting websites, mostly because the story is rarely, if ever, tracked by United States news groups, such as Fox or CNN. My most recent finding is from SBS Dateline, a multi-award winning international current affairs program which provides stories for Australians about life beyond Australia’s shores. Upon watching the video report, I noticed some differences between SBS's manner of reporting, when compared to that within the U.S.

The SBS Dateline program is presented by George Negus, one of Australia’s most respected journalists, and is made up of a team of acclaimed producers and ‘video journalists’. Introducing their report on "The Skin Trade", Negus begins, "Good day, and welcome again to tonight—a focus on Africa, one so often bypassed by we media types."

The reason for why hearing Negus' introduction was so surprising to me, was because it illustrated a sense of self-awareness that is commonly absent among news groups, particularly those in the U.S. Essentially, Negus is admitting that world events, particularly those in Africa, are often neglected the proper attention they deserve by more "Western" news groups from the First World. Expressing this notion prior the story on the "skin trade" is extremely significant, because it is a story that evokes much sympathy and a desire to help. By introducing the story in such a way, Negus alludes to the idea that horrific situations, such as the one in Tanzania, occur often in Africa, and are just as often neglected by Western media, and therefore, the Western world.

Negus more objective style of reporting is common among international news groups, however often rare in U.S. media. This style is very refreshing because it expresses the truths of media coverage in the Western world. If the media's job is to inform, they seem even more credible when they take a critical shot at themselves. It is my hope that this sort of understanding can permeate media in the U.S., in turn, offering a more objective and worldly reporting of news.

The Corruption of Today's Youth by...Sesame Street?

2009-11-20T09:52:00.000-08:00

This week when I was reading the news online, I came across a story addressing the fallacy of the "Bert and Ernie gay rumor." The article describes how the controversy is based on how they are portrayed in the show: "The share a room...They bicker like husband and wife. They frequently break out into song. One has a curious obsession with his rubber ducky." It also points out how even in the very first episode of Sesame Street "Ernie can be seen taking a bath with Bert in the background." In 1994, this scandal resulted in an evangelist priest calling for the characters to be banned because of these characteristics.
And Bert and Ernie are not the only two children characters facing this controversy, as "Anti-gay groups have accused SpongBob SquarePants and Tinky Winy of the 'Teletubbies' of harboring a homosexual agenda."
But what I don't understand is how can the Teletubbies promote homosexuality if they aren't even defined by a gender- the lat time I checked, they were just giant, creepy looking, blob like figures with no characteristics of gender. Critics accuse Tinky Winky of being a homosexual figure because "he" is purple and carries a "purse" but for all we know, maybe Tinky Winky is a girl. It is completely arbitrary. And while Spongebob may be portrayed as a sensitive character, I have definitely noticed some sexual tension between him and Sandy in the show. And in the article, Gary Knell, president of Sesame Workshop describes it perfectly: Bert and Ernie "are not gay. They are not straight...They don't exist below the waist."
However, I find it ironic that this controversy arises just because of the characteristics of these characters. And it is the media that perpetuates these characteristics as "gay," when in reality, they are not. There are plenty of straight men who are sensitive (although, maybe not that many, but they are out there); and if you look in college dorms across the nation, roommates are based on gender- it is not "gay" that Bert and Ernie live together, it is just a commonality. In fact, on Will and Grace, Will was gay and he lived with a girl. Thus, I think this whole concept of characters created to entertain the minds of 5 year olds as really characters carrying this whole different agenda, to be absurd.

http://www.sphere.com/2009/11/09/bert-and-ernie-arent-gay-muppet-rumors-and-scandals/

Framing of Foreign News

2009-11-20T09:35:00.000-08:00

This week I wrote a paper on the framing of foreign news by media sources. It helped me realize the influences Media has on the way people perceive certain news stories. I read an article by Robert Entman which compared the two news stories that were exactly the same but were presented differently by the media. It was the story of the Korean Airline being shot down by the Soviet Union and how it was viewed as a murderous event. The same incident happened to the United States, where they brought down an innocent civilian plan and their actions were considered a mistake. While the Soviet were protrayed as Killers the U.S. was portrayed not responsible for the incident. The news organizations used images and language to portray each incident differently which the public believed. Now this was in the 80s but it seems like news framing is still happening today.
Fox news for instance is the most bias news corporation ever. News is supposed to be unbiased and factual for the most part, in order for the public to develop their own opinions about the events that are happening throughout the world. Instead they frame their news stories to fit the republican parties political agenda. The news reporters use vague words and use their own opinions in their news coverage.
I feel news framing will never end and we as the audience will always receive an altered version of the real facts.

George Lopez and Stereotypes

2009-11-20T06:28:00.000-08:00

This week the new talk show "Lopez Tonight'' by George Lopez premiered on TBS. The show follows all the criteria of a talk show except that the guests of this show are mostly of Hispanic descent. What struck me about this show is the many stereotypical comments made by the host, George Lopez. As many of you may know, George Lopez is of Hispanic descent and many of his remarks follow stereotypes of Hispanic culture. Like for example, in one segment of his show he brings two people from the audience for a little game. the game consists of playing a video of a street interview where questions would be asked to people who belonged to minorities (mostly Asian and Hispanic people) and the people from the audience were supposed to guess the answers. I found this game highly offensive because they referred to many stereotypes made about the respective cultures of the interviewees. For example, they asked a Hispanic woman if she was pregnant and a black man if he had ever gotten shot. What I found interesting about this is the fact that he has not gotten any negative feedback from this. This makes me ask myself if the fact that George Lopez himself belongs to a minority makes it okay for him to make these remarks. For me, the comments by him should be considered as offensive as if they came from a White talk show host. Even though they are done in a funny connotation, they add to the stereotypes that are already made about Hispanics and other minorities. The fact that someone from an actual minority is making stereotypical comments about that minority makes these comments more legitimate and thought to be true. The consequences of this is affirming the beliefs and ideas other people have of minorities which makes the stereotype harder to vanish.

Victoria's Secret on TV

2009-11-19T19:16:00.000-08:00

As I was watching a bunch of shows on TV tonight (Survivor, Grey's Anatomy and Project Runway), I was faced with a bunch of ads from Victoria's Secret. They are pushing their new line called Miraculous Push-up. I saw the ad at least five times in the span of three hours, maybe more. Their tagline is "Hello Bombshell." It is obvious that Victoria's Secret is working very hard to launch this new bra, as they always do, and to get people to be interested and go buy! But besides the fact that I saw this ad so many times I also realized that every ad is very sexualized and the models wear practically nothing. Obviously the models are only wearing bras and panties, and since this is a push-up bra, their boobs are hanging out of the bra basically. It is actually kind of shocking that we allow these ads on TV, what would a young child think? I guess they shouldn't be up this late? I realized that I am basically desensitized to these images and am no longer shocked that the VS models wear practically nothing on TV. These images are appearing to us in an attempt to suck women into buying this new push-up bra and to get the men to go get it for their woman or suggest it. I'm always surprised and impressed by the number of men I always see when I go to the VS store. I think it is pretty brave to buy lingerie for your significant other, but obviously it is benefitting both parties I guess so men are willing to do it. The ads also appeal to any guy sitting on a couch because the models are good looking, very skinny and their boobs are basically hanging out. I just think it is interesting because we would never see a man walking in his underwear on TV. This just doesn't happen. Instead women parade around in their underwear but men don't get to. It is strange to me that it is ok for women to be partially nude on TV, but men never do it. I'm not saying they should, but then again I'm not sure it's appropriate that women do it either.

Here is the ad that I saw a bunch of times...it is showing us the new Miraculous Push-up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJiBsAjA22E

Boogie Night: Sex, Porn, and Gender Representations

2009-11-18T23:10:00.000-08:00

I remember the first time I saw Boogie Nights. I thought the concept was fantastic—it’s about a pornographer who is convinced that he can make that industry one of “art” not just “sex.” It’s a film by P.T. Anderson that follows Eddie Adams, played by Mark Wahlberg, as he is transformed into the porn star nick-named “Dirk Diggler” by porn director Jack Horner, played by Burt Reynolds, who is trying to revolutionize the porn-industry by adding actual plot-lines and acting to supplement the sex in the films. I think this is a film that is interesting to observe gender representations in because one of the most blatant themes in the film is that of sex. The film centers around Eddie Adams, a high school student who is “discovered” because he is well-endowed. He enters the porn industry with trepidation, in part to spite his mother. In his first scene, he is “partnered” with Amber Waves, played by Julianne Moore, a strong female character who is a regular in Jack Horner’s films. She is confident in her sexuality and with her job and never feels exploited or used. She also, strangely enough, acts as sort of the mother figure on set and among Horner’s regular porn-actors. She takes on both male and female characteristics; male ones of being desensitized to emotions during sex and female ones with her caring nature and motherly instincts.

Meanwhile, Dirk becomes more stereotypically male as he starts to realize the power of his “manhood,” so to speak. As he becomes famous in the porn-industry, he gets caught up in the hype of it all and involved with all of the drugs and fame. When filming one scene, he tells Jack “You’re not the boss of me, Jack. You’re not the king of Dirk. I’m the boss of me. I’m the king of me. I’m Dirk Diggler. I’m the star. It’s my big dick and I say when we roll.” It’s interesting that the physical characteristics of being male readily contribute to his arrogant-male mindset.

The clip below shows Amber talking to Dirk right before they’re set to have sex on film—the first time for Dirk, a standard routine for Amber. You can see their business-like interaction about something so much more sexual. Amber’s sweet and feminine characteristics are also played up, but they make her appear stronger and more confident than Dirk. Overall, it’s an interesting gender dynamic, and if you haven’t seen this movie, you definitely should!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IE50Khf_kJs

Transgender Roommate Called "It"

2009-11-18T10:14:00.000-08:00

Katelynn Cusanelli of “The Real World Brooklyn” was the first transgender Real World roommate in the history of the show, and she had just gotten her transgender surgery in Thailand the summer before she entered the house. What’s interesting about Katelynn’s dynamic with her roommates was how the housemates all reacted differently and treated her differently depending on their own personal life experiences, gazes, and beliefs. By the end of the first episode, there was speculation amongst everyone in the house about whether or not Katelynn was a transgender, a boy, or a girl, but each roommate reacted to the situation in a different way.

Ryan, the Iraqi War veteran, is the roommate who struggled most with the idea of Katelynn being transgendered, and he couldn’t believe that Katelynn would cut off her penis. He even goes so far at one point to call Katelynn “it,” because he does not know how to categorize her. Ryan really represents conservative middle America, and him calling Katelynn “it” is a great example of transgendered people struggling to have a “place” in society. It seems easier for him to call her gay, a lesbian, or bisexual, but as a transgender person, she does not have any of those titles. JD, who is the gay roommate, immediately reprimands Ryan for these statements, and it’s clear that JD, being gay, is more open and understanding about Katelynn’s situation than Ryan is. The female roommates in the house all have no problem with Katelynn being transgendered, she is accepted as “one of the girls,” and they become very close with her and support her.

A theme throughout the entire season is Katelynn trying to explain to people that she is a female. She is a girl, she had identified with being a female her entire life, she has a boyfriend, and she finally became comfortable with her body after having her transgender surgery. While Katelynn was living in the house, she worked frequently with LGBT, and has really shed light on this situation on a national level. She has been deemed a pioneer in helping people to understand the transgender community, because her entire struggle was broadcast on television. She does not represent a stereotypical transgendered person that might be present in a sitcom, but she instead sheds light on the very real and genuine struggle of a person dealing with their transition, as well as society’s view of her as a transgendered individual. Towards the end of the season, even Ryan had begun to accept her as a girl, but the relationship between Ryan and Katelynn is a great example of people’s difficulty in categorizing transgender people.

Where are the accurate lesbian representations in media??

2009-11-18T09:53:00.000-08:00

Recently Gossip Girl aired their scandalous threesome episode. The episode got some major heat from the Parents Television Council and it is a product of the male gaze and a poor representation of homosexuality in media. Not surprisingly, this threesome occurred between two women and one man and played completely into male fantasies. The scene at the end of the episode showed the two women characters kissing each other, while an eager man watched on. From this scene, people might think that sexuality is a fluid, constantly changing thing. Yes the characters on the show are heterosexual, but they also have no problem engaging in homosexual moments, especially if it is for the pleasure of a man.

Lesbian representation in media is more rare and more fantasized then representations of gay men. While gay men in the media are stereotyped as flamboyant, musical theater loving shoppers, lesbians are created for the pleasure of the heterosexual male. I do not watch The L Word but I cant think of one accurate representation of a lesbian on a television show today. When lesbians do make their appearance, it is usually for a girl-on-girl make out scene. Producers like to use the lesbian card to boost ratings and to appeal to a different audience. This season of Gossip Girl has experienced extremely lower ratings then previous seasons and is watched primarily by girls in high school and college. The executives at CW heavily advertised the shocking new episode so that they could increase their viewers and so that they could widen their viewer-ship, hoping that some young males would want to tune in for the scene.

These representations are absurdly unrealistic. I would imagine that few lesbians are amused by these representations of them in media nor would most find them representative of the homosexual culture. Television needs to work harder to integrate lesbian characters onto television shows, without them being temporary or used for male pleasure.

Us and Them

2009-11-16T13:21:00.000-08:00

We are citizens of the United States, the “land of the free,” where “all men are created equal” and are supposedly granted the freedom of speech and religion among other things. It is because of its freedoms that this nation attracts a diverse range of people. With this free ideology then, why is it that minorities are often tolerated rather than accepted? Are those tolerated privy to the same inherit rights that the dominant, or general public has access to? Through analyzing these questions, we will develop a better understanding of how free our nation truly is.

Leading up to California’s highly controversial vote to ban same-sex marriage on November 4, 2008, an abundance of propaganda was sent streaming through various channels of media. One particularly influential piece of media that was used to support a “Yes” vote to ban same-sex marriage was a YouTube video titled, “Proposition 8 — Made Simple.” The video, created by ProtectMarriage.com, illustrates a “Plain English” description of the history behind the vote on Proposition 8, as well as a fictitious circumstance between a heterosexual couple, Tom and Jan, and a gay couple, Dan and Michael. In the ad, though Tom and Jan are neighbors and close friends with Dan and Michael, they decide to vote YES for Proposition 8 on the basis of family and moral values. The relationship between the two couples provides an excellent example of the use of tolerance as a façade for acceptance within society.

Tolerance is often a product of an interaction between two or more conflicting social groups. In the case of same-sex marriage and gay rights in general, there are those that are strongly against gay rights, those that are proponents for gay rights, and then there is an intermediary group described by Ann Pellegrini and Janet Jakobsen as the “tolerant middle” (Jakobsen and Pellegrini, 56). The tolerant middle essentially describes the group of people that represent neither parties of radically different views, but instead they are more equivalent to what is deemed the general public, or “‘middle America’… the assumed audience and the assumed subject of public address” (56). Within this piece of propaganda it is heterosexual couple, Tom and Jan, who represent this “tolerant middle.” The narrator of the video describes Tom and Jan’s “realization” that, “they can respect Dan and Michael’s lifestyle choice without affirming and embracing their lifestyle.” This essentially describes how they are tolerant of the homosexual relationship of their neighbors, however when asked to accept their relationship as one of equal value to their own heterosexual one, they are unable to do so. As a result, Tom and Jan are creating a clearly defined distinction between Dan and Michael, and themselves, where “tolerance sets up an us-them relation in which ‘we’ tolerate ‘them’” (50). The “we” within an “us-them” relationship directly refers to the general public and therefore poses “them”, or the proponents of gay marriage, as the minority within this community. The dividing properties of an “us-them” relationship in turn create a social hierarchy placing the “tolerant middle” at a higher status than the gay rights proponents. In doing so, the dominant public is often illustrated as being a group with higher, or at least more popular, moral standings that is able to reach down with the vehicle of tolerance to the lesser, minoritized group. One must ask however, if the illusion of acceptance through tolerance is wanted by those minoritized?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI-GjWY-WlA

Modern Family

2009-11-14T11:07:00.000-08:00

I just started watching this new show called Modern Family. It airs on ABC, but I watch it on my laptop on Hulu (yay media convergence!). The show centers around this very dysfunctional family where three generations play a role in the plot. The grandfather is married to a hispanic woman who is younger than his daughter, his gay son and his partner have just adopted a baby girl from China, and his ex wife (played by Cheers' Shelly Long), tries to come back into the family to break up the marriage. The show deals with a lot of issues about representation that we have been talking about recently because the couples and relationships are all a bit unorthodox. A beautiful suburban housewife is married to a really dorky man with awkward social skills, a sexy Latina woman is married to a man twice her age, and the gay relationship takes a look at certain stereotypes of gay people. The show is funny because nobody can escape being represented - there is really something for everybody. Part of the humor of the show comes from the fact that it is a somewhat accurate representation of human nature, no matter how ridiculous it can be. The show is filmed as a regular episode, but has interjections of Christopher Guest-esq interviews with an anonymous interviewer. The characters sit on a couch and look just past the camera, but it serves to give us a better insight into their personalities. I think it's up to the viewer to decide whether or not ABC is making fun of these stereotypes in a malicious way, or if their poking fun at it brings the issue of representation to national attention.

Are American Girls really American?

2009-11-13T23:49:00.000-08:00

It has become very clear that every aspect of our lives are affected by mainstream ideologies pushed onto us by the “establishment”. The powerful do this by making certain aspects of society seem normal, they become so normalized that we don’t even realize, or think about these aspects of our lives.

The fact that men are considered naturally more domineering, or whiteness has become the norm to compare all else are two examples of how we have become blind to the corruption in society because these issues become natural.

This is exactly how the powerful rule with consent in the hegemonic structure. With just a little education one can easily learn to critically analyze the media and its never-ending issues. What I have found most interesting are the critiques on child products. In Disney films, dolls, or toys in general they all are advertised to children and parents in a way, which encourage a strict division between girls and boys. Or products that continue to treat minorities as others, not the same as whites but exotic creatures to study.

Meeting with my group last week we started on the subject of kid’s items. It was interesting how we could find all these flaws with items, which appeared to be innocent. I remember loving the American Girl Dolls. The first one I ever received was Addie, the African American girl whose family was enslaved. Then I was given Josephine, the girl from Mexico. Then the there was Samantha the upper class Caucasian American girl, who was spoiled and bratty but somehow, grows and learns to be a young lady. All of this you could learn about within the American doll books, but as a young child, all that mattered was whether they had hair long enough to braid or clothing cute enough to change the dolls. I always wanted Samantha, but my parents made me believe that Samantha was boring and Addie and these other dolls of other ethnicities were more interesting and pretty.

Yes, they had good intentions because they encouraged me at a young age to be open to people who are different then I am. The problem was that all of these dolls represented the stereotypical representations of other ethnicities. Josephine has a native shall, and a fan attached to her wrist. She had a bun in her hair and white lace smock type shirt. Her outfit was traditional and in away she became more of a spectacle rather then someone just like me. Did I realize this as a young girl? Of course I didn’t critically analyze my dolls, but I do believe I saw them more as girls from these strange unknown worlds. These dolls show stereotypical representations of women/girls from other countries.

Why wasn’t Samantha portrayed as being poor? Through books you could learn about the dolls lives and all of the white dolls were wealthy, while all the minorities lived in the primitive and usually poverty stricken state. The non-white dolls were treated more as exotic characters rather then girls just like the ones playing with them.

So who are buying these dolls? Mainly people who have enough money to spend 100 dollars for a doll and another 100 for clothing. This means middle to upper class girls are playing with dolls that are just like them or exotic dolls from another planet. Why not make a white doll that is poor? Or a Mexican doll that is rich? The white wealthy upper class rule America and this is one way it is reflected in our society. This company sold to parents the idea that kids could learn about other ethnicities, yet they still promoted mainstream ideologies. It may seem insignificant, but at that age we absorb things like a sponge. I liked Samantha, because she had the nicest clothing, the prettiest hair, the best accessories and this starts to demonstrate the divisions between races and classes. Of course I have learned to not fallow these beliefs, but many girls don’t become exposed to the same cultural experiences; opportunities I was fortunate to have.

Sex and The Fake NY City

2009-11-13T23:48:00.001-08:00

All of these women live their lives in NYC and yet we never see minorities. New York City is known for its diversity and people from all walks of life and yet we rarely see any example of this in Sex and The City. I can think of only a few episodes with minorities or other nationalities, but these portrayals can easily be critiqued.

The first example is when Samantha begins dating this African American guy. The attraction she has for him becomes more about the fact that he is African American and not because he is just a nice guy, or good looking or some other characteristic in which she judges Caucasian men she has affairs with. Once again we see another race being compared to whiteness, which is the norm. He is portrayed as being different and unusual because of his race. She even changes the way she dresses when she goes to a club with prominently African Americans. Why do this? Right here she shows her dependence on a man and the fact that she is willing to change everything about her, because of a man. It also emphasizes the difference between African Americans and Caucasians. In this episode he is portrayed as exotic and overly sexual, stereotypes that have been present in American society for many years.

The only other examples of none American, Caucasian characters are Europeans. They seem to always be portrayed as glamour, charming and beautiful people, who seem to have some strange aspect about them. In one episode Carrie runs into her European friend who she says is trashy. She also mentions how this European woman lives a glamorous life style. Carrie has a one-night stand with a gorgeous and charming French man (she meets through her friend) but he leaves her money at the end. Thus, he treats her as if she was a prostitute. Europeans are treated as portraying some sort of strangeness. They can’t just be like most people you meet, but they have to be extremes. They are overly sexual, charming, good looking and with some major flaw which makes them seem odd.

Another words this show is about American, Caucasian people and the “others” who enter the main characters lives for brief moments. People of other ethnicities are insignificant in the world of Sex and The City, despite the fact that the show takes place in one of the most diverse cities.

The End of the World - Except for Whites.

2009-11-13T21:12:00.000-08:00

Today, the film 2012 was released to the public. After reading and discussing the article by Hall ("The Whites of Their Eyes") one can notice that most films or TV shows are through the "White eyes" perspective. For this film, the main characters are a white family, and most of the film seems like it is centered upon white people. Yes, there are snippets of other nationalities in it, but the main focus is on America, and its White people, even though the population of America is not only White Caucasians.

Just quickly looking at the trailer, it is easy to pass the movie as just a suspense film that might possibly be entertaining, but what does this truly say to us? Whites are superior and worthy of survival. Other nations will perish, but America and the White race will find a way to overcome the destruction of earth.

Also, the topic of an Apocalypse or the end of the world has been going around for a while, so it seems natural that someone would make a film out of it to scare the public. As Hall discusses in another article ("Representation") human beings find things troublesome if they do not fit in a category neatly. The unknown or the abnormal are all treated as something threatening or taboo, so this fear is directly reflected in the film. However, something tells me that this Columbia pictures film made for the public will not end in tragedy. In this capitalist society, movies must be happy-endings because that will bring people and money right?

Reebok EasyTone Shoes: The Female Body Really is an Object!

2009-11-13T19:22:00.000-08:00

I realize that my last few posts have been a feminist tirade against sexism in advertising and other popular media, but this is very likely to be my last such post.

Reebok has recently launched an ad campaign for its new EasyTone shoes that tone your "butt" while you walk. This ad is obviously aimed at women (as is evident by the female protagonists as well as the subject matter), but is marketed from a male's point of view: women are viewed as objects (or, more accurately, as parts of objects- there value lies in the shape of their boobs/butt as these are the focus of the ads). Thus, while the product itself is for women, it is marketed to appeal to men.

The above ad shows the camera focusing on the main woman's buttocks, and she eventually sees it as a complement. She completely disregards the fact that what she was saying (i.e. what she actually had to contribute) was insignificant, and that her body is the main source of her appeal. She accepts that she is a sex object, not a person.

This ad, on the other hand, makes the sexism overt. The woman is no longer seen as a person, but as boobs and an ass. She is left voiceless, while her boobs "bitch" (because, of course, women contemplate nothing other than the downfall of others) about her butt, which they claim is getting too much attention.

These ads unnerved me particularly because of my recent visit to the "Journey" exhibit outside the Silver Center. This exhibit aims to showcase the plight of those forced into prostitution and to shed light on human trafficking.

http://nyunews.com/news/2009/nov/11/journey/

The view of women as less than human has been overtly expressed by Reebok, but it has been made socially acceptable due to its "comedic" nature.

Glee -- The New "O.C."

2009-11-13T18:42:00.000-08:00

It has been six years since the “The O.C.” premiered on Fox. Since then a slew of “soap-edy” shows have tried to re-create the series’ glory days. In September 2009, one show seems to have succeeded: “Glee.” Praised for its snappy plotlines, sharp—at times ironic—dialogue, and musical numbers, “Glee” is being touted as the next big thing. Its cast is ethnically diverse and features one openly homosexual character (and mentions others) as well as one who was confined to a wheelchair at age eight. The show itself claims to be continually being light to the plight of the high school outcast. However, after reading Meyer’s Masculinities on the O.C., I realized that the categories of hegemonic, complicit, marginalized, and subordinate devised by R.W. Connell that Meyer places “The O. C.’s” male and female characters still apply to the characters of “Glee.”

The show’s predominate sexual relationships are strictly heterosexual. One of the characters, an African America girl named Mercedes, even falls for the obviously homosexual Kurt. He turns down her advances, explaining that he is gay but does not yet have the guts to come out of the closet.

With regards to hegemonic masculinity, the central male teenage characters of Puck and Finn encompass this gender identity. Both are considered to be attractive, athletic, and are show engaging in fights, some times even with each other. Though Finn seems to get in touch with sensitive side by joining glee club, he remains true to the football as well and parlays his social dominance as a tool for convincing others to join glee. However, when his girlfriend, Quinn, informs him that she is pregnant (not by him, but by Puck) he accepts the truth, and takes on the responsibility of fatherhood as his manly duty. Puck is the more violent of the two, and does anything in his power to cement his role as a dominant male.

During the episode, “Wheels,” Puck asserts his manliness by first punching Finn for not covering Quinn’s sonogram bill, and then vowing that he will take care of Quinn monetarily. He bakes batches of cupcakes with a dash of marijuana tossed in so that customers would keep coming back for more. Originally, the money is meant to buy a handicap accessible bus for the glee club’s trip to sectionals, but Puck steals the money to give it to Quinn in order to prove to her that he is a family man through and though. She turns it down, saying that the money belongs to the club. However, when Finn announces that he has gotten a job to pay for Quinn’s prenatal care, she accepts his charity.

The complicit male stereotype most accurately reflects the glee club’s teacher, Mr. Schuester. While Schuester is not violent, encourages the students to be true to themselves, and even tries to help them understand the difficulties of another—having the entire club spend a week in wheelchairs to learn how the disabled Artie feels—he never challenges his place as in the gendered world. Interestingly, Schuester is a victim to his wife Terri’s manipulation and lies. She undergoes a hysterical pregnancy, but once made aware of her condition she does not inform Schuester. Instead, she basks in the glow of his new found desire to assert his masculinity in order to be a good father while crafting her own plot to take Quinn’s baby as her own.

The wheelchair bound Artie occupies the category of the marginalized male. Yet, during “Wheels,” he blatantly states that although he has lost the use of his legs, his penis is still fully functional. He clings to the most basic depiction of masculinity to maintain his status as a man.

The subordinate category is occupied by Kurt, who comes out of the closet in the fourth episode. As in “The O.C.,” Kurt’s hegemonic male father struggles with this reality, and is unsettled when he receives an anonymous call declaring: “Your son’s a fag.” Kurt’s assurances that he is strong enough to handle the world’s prejudices put his father somewhat at ease, but the man admits that it will take time for him to develop the sort of mental defenses Kurt already has.

Lastly, the roles of the women on “Glee” test patriarchic society as the female roles on “The O.C.” did. The character of Sue Sylvester, the tyrannical cheerleading coach, is the most obvious representation of a woman being able to assert herself and stifle any demonstrations of her colleagues’ masculinity. Both Quinn and Terri are manipulating their significant other into believing that they are pregnant with Finn and Schuester’s child respectfully. They both state how dumb Finn and Schuester are and do not worry about being able to outsmart them. As for Puck, Quinn declares him a “lime-a-loser” and swears that she will keep pretending her baby’s Finn’s for entire life. The only two women who seemingly occupy the typical female gender role are Emma, the school’s guidance counselor, and Rachel, the glee club’s female lead. However, both these woman desire men whom are already spoken for, and continue to pine for them.

Below is the link for the episode "Wheels." Enjoy!

http://www.hulu.com/watch/107036/glee-wheels#s-p1-so-i0

Males in Arrested Development

2009-11-13T18:17:00.001-08:00

Arrested Development is probably my favorite television show ever. I became obsessed with it when it first came out on DVD and can quote far too many lines from the show. When we were talking about the masculinities and their portrayal in The OC in class, I thought of a show that portrayed men in a quite different light.

First there’s Michael, the character that all the others seem to center around and the most stereotypically male character. There’s his brother Gob, who is a crazy and dumb wannabe magician. Then there’s the father, Oscar, who is constantly avoiding his marital issues while hiding from the authorities who are trying to arrest him. There’s Buster, the younger brother, who, in his 30s is still a complete mama’s boy with absolutely no social awareness. Tobias is the husband of Michael’s sister Lindsey and self-proclaimed “analrapist” (pronounced “uh-nal-ruh-pist”), who is flamboyant and often the source of many jokes about his questionable sexuality. Finally there is George Michael, Michael’s son who wears khakis and Hawaiian shirts and screams and guards his face when a ball is thrown to him in catch.

What’s interesting to note is that although all of these male characters are portrayed as pretty out there and insane, the ones that have the least masculine characteristics are Tobias, Buster, and George Michael. Although Gob is absolutely ridiculous and embarrasses himself in situations, his overstated masculine qualities (his obsession with women and sex, for one), make him appear as a stronger character. Conversely, Tobias, George Michael, and Buster are all weak characters, often influenced and bullied by their more “masculine relatives.” It is also interesting to note that these three more effeminate males are all ruled by the women in their lives. Buster hangs on Lucille, his mother’s, every words and the majority of his actions are either to spite her or to win her approval. Tobias strives to prove to his wife that he is competent both in life and in the bedroom, and George Michael will do anything to try to win the affections of his cousin that he is secretly in love with. I put a YouTube video of a compilation of Tobias’s sexually questionable lines and actions. Watch it. And the show. It’s awesome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDSqcCPRsW0

Black Eyed Peas and Orientalism?

2009-11-13T17:31:00.000-08:00

We're all victims of it. Assuming we know have that right to even pretend to know what other cultures are really like. Exoticizing places like Jamaica for their beautiful scenery despite the fact that residents of the place may actually be oppressed and unhappy. Even in our "post racial" society, orientalism continues to show up, unchecked. I would argue that it's the acceptable form of racism in our day that is just NOT okay. Take a look at this video by the Black Eyed Peas, "Meet Me Halfway". What in the world makes Fergie think she's so exotically hot, and really? Arabs on the moon? I mean come on, what is this video saying about positionality and the Western discourse of us vs the other? And this coming from the "socially conscious" Black Eyed Peas? I'm not so convinced.

The Gay Steryotype

2009-11-13T16:11:00.000-08:00

I came across this interesting article in this weeks Newsweek (http://www.newsweek.com/id/222467) highlighting the most prominent group in subordinate masculinity: homosexuals. Flashback twenty years and you would not find a single gay or lesbian character on prime time television. The presence of shows like Glee and The L Word and gay and lesbian characters featured on popular shows such as Ugly Betty, Greys Anatomy and True Blood has changed America's opinions and familiarity with homosexuals. However, not all gay characters are necessarily helping homosexuals gain acceptance across the country. When the gay character first began to become mainstreamed the media portrayed a diverse group of people. For example, Dawson's Creek created a jock character who eventually came out as being gay and Will from Will & Grace hardly seemed "gay". Today, all the gay male characters on television seem to be deeply flamboyant and stereotypical. It seems like every gay male represented on television is a cookie cutter model of the Queer Eye For The Straight Guy men. Tim Gunn, Lloyd from Entourage, Marc from Ugly Betty and Jack from Will and Grace are all the same. Of course it is important that there be a homosexual presence in media, however the gay men that are today being represented are an unrealistic representation of gays overall. Some think that this may be translating to the polls where more and more Americans are voting against gay marriage legislation.

Lesbians on television are a different story. Besides for being less prevalent than males, they are also subject to the male gaze. Since men are often the people creating these characters, they often are a reflection of male fantasies: all seem to be super sexy and curvy. Additionally, lesbians are often depicted as being bi-sexual, another fantasy of the male producers.

While we have made many strides in the presence of minorities on television, particularly the homosexual population. The gay male stereotype needs to be expanded from its effeminate, glitzy and flamboyant cookie cutter and the lesbian characters should stop showing homosexuality as a choice or a phase for young attractive women.

Postmodernism and Modern Music

2009-11-13T16:08:00.000-08:00

If the era of postmodernity can be traced back to the mid 20th century, then it coincides nearly perfectly with the conception of the modern music industry.

Modern music is a paradox - artists strive to create a niche, a new sound that will set them apart from thousands of other aspiring musicians. In creating a new sound, they inevitably employ sounds that have been used before. As music has existed for hundreds of years, this reuse is merely the nature of the art form. In this respect, modern music and the postmodern era are products of one another. Now, more than ever, artists are employing the technique of 'sampling' - using (with permission) anywhere from a single bar of a song to an entire chorus. Hip hop music was conceived from the sampling of existing songs.

I find this paradox extremely challenging when I'm at work, scouring blogs and websites in hopes of finding new musical talent. To find an artist who makes great music is not difficult. to find an artist who employs new techniques to reinvent a familiar sound and create something compelling, catchy, marketable and groundbreaking is nearly impossible. Additionally, finding new talent does not mean finding what will be popular now. Rather, predicting what WILL be popular 2,3 or 5 years from now.

Perhaps the only aspect of music that is creating and employing the new, rather than adjusting the existing, is the technological (aspect). The advent of synthesizers, vocoders, MIDI keyboards and programs like Logic 8 and Protools allow musicians and producers to create and arrange sounds in a way never before possible. As with all technologies, however, it is only a matter of time before such platforms are obsolete and technological simulation of instruments is so close to reality that they are one and the same.

The future of music and the era into which we will eventually (if we have not already) enter will only be evident in retrospect. Given the current cool climate within the music industry due to lackluster album sales, a cynical attitude and outlook towards the future prevails. Cynicism is a product of quarters and quarters of being in the red, but is also a quintessential quality of the postmodernist era.

Mad Men and Masculinity... SPOILER ALERT.

2009-11-13T15:38:00.000-08:00

WARNING: If you watch the show Mad Men and haven't seen the Season 3 Finale, don't read this post.

Don't get me wrong, I love the show Mad Men. In fact, it's one of my favorite shows of all time (how about that finale... SUCH a cliffhanger). However, the one thing that I cannot stand is the way characters' masculinity is proven over and over again. Don Draper, Pete Campbell and Roger Sterling are typical men's men. All three assert their masculinity through their frequent affairs (all are married), especially Don Draper who will screw just about anything in a skirt. When it is revealed that a coworker at Sterling Cooper is gay, they mock him in a further effort to prove their masculinity.

Even more puzzling, perhaps is the way that the women on the show are dealt with. When Betty Draper suspects that Don is cheating on her, she is shown to be a "crazy" woman as she ransacks his office for proof of his affairs. When she finally leaves him for another man in the Season 3 Finale, he calls her a whore. Why is it that Don, who is as promiscuous as they come, is manly for his conquests while Betty, who leaves Don for a man who actually loves her, a whore and a crazy woman? Joan Holloway, your stereotypical sexy secretary, marries the man who date rapes her, sending the message that love (or rather being with someone) is more important for a woman than her safety.

I know that some of the sexism in the show is there because the show is set in the early 1960s, but I think that most of it is problematic and very troubling.

I wasn't "expecting" that

2009-11-13T15:14:00.000-08:00

Generally when I, along with most people, think of a middle aged soon-to-be mother the images that cross my mind are those of happy couples, baby showers, tiny colorful clothes, and excited families. But that is certainly not always the case. I saw this ad and I feel stupid to say that I was shocked because I'm fully aware that things like this happen it is just disturbing to actually see them.

This advertisement is part of a three ad series, the other two are an elderly woman with a cut lip and a black eye, and a young child witnessing an act of abuse.

These kinds of incidences aren't those that people associate with violence when they think of the word, but that doesn't make them any less real.

Usually I am annoyed by ads that I feel are trying too hard to get attention but I don't feel that this one is. Yes, it is graphic but it isn't purely for a charity organization. It's for the women's shelter. They do take donations but I don't feel like they are tricking people into sympathizing for this woman just so they can make money by putting out these ads. I think they are actually trying to provoke an awareness in people that this does happen. Even though we have been brought up to believe that having a child is the most beautiful experience and that there is "no glow like the glow of a pregnant woman" it is not always such a flowery happy time in a women's life.

2009-11-13T12:23:00.001-08:00

If you are from the tri-state area, you are familiar with the "Guido" culture. Guidos are catagorized by their over-gelled spiked hair, tanned skin, and macho attitude. They wear Armani Exchange and Guess and they spend all their time at the gym and in the clubs. They listen to techno music while doing the "jersey fist pump". They are womanizers and are always looking to start a fight and they are almost always Italian. MTV happens to be premiering a new show called Jersey Shore on December 3rd which follows the lives of Guidos on the beaches, boardwalk, and clubs of South Jersey. I find the entire concept hilarious because I'm from New Jersey and I actually know a lot of people who embody the Guido stereotype. However, this show really serves no purpose but to promote the idea that everyone from New Jersey is a spoiled, angry alcoholic that lives off of mommy and daddy. The entire Guido culture is a reflection of hegemonic masculinity- they are supposed to be buff and tan with a beautiful woman ("guidette") at their side. What is so ironic is the fact that Guidos spend so much time defending their masculinity but they actually take part in many stereotypical female behaviors. They like to shop, spend hours getting ready, get their eyebrows waxed, go to the tanning salon, and are generally superficial human beings. The entire development of Guido culture completely fascinates me and I already know that I will be sucked into watching this show every week. I'm curious to see how MTV will represent this subculture.

MTV Shows

The "Other"

2009-11-13T10:45:00.000-08:00

An interesting thing we talked about this week was the other. It is very weird to think that we have people that we associate with our group and that everyone else is basically an other. But in every community this type of thinking exists regardless of whether we mean to or not. For example, when I went to Beijing for the Olympics, I quickly realized that I was a very obvious other. I am about 5' 7" so I am taller then most of the people there and I have blonde hair and blue eyes. This was definitely strange to many people who would stare at me and my family (we all have blonde hair and blue eyes). People would ask to touch my hair or to take pictures, because I'm pretty sure none of them had ever seen someone who looked like me besides maybe in movies. I'm in no way a celebrity, but some of the people sure made me feel like I was. People were just fascinated with the "other" which was us light skinned Americans. It was a very interesting experience and I definitely felt like a did not fit in but rather stuck out like a sore thumb. It was pretty obvious I was an other.

In the United States we definitely exotify the other in many ways. We separate ourselves from people of other countries, and we make other places seem like they are so foreign, exotic and different from our own country. I haven't been to many places, but this past summer I was able to travel a little bit in Europe. I went to Germany, Paris and London. One thing I found interesting was how I had these big perceptions of what the countries were going to be like because of movies, advertisements and various other types of media that glorify these places to intrigue the viewer. Tourism is a huge business, so countries want you to love their ads and be enticed into going. I was struck by how similar these places where to the United States. Many times I didn't feel like I was really in a foreign country and many people even spoke english so that wasn't hard to deal with either. I felt like I had these grand images in my head and when I got their I loved the places I went, but I was very taken aback by the actual place in front of me. The cities were pretty, but just not as magical as I had assumed they would be. I have been fed these images of foreign countries all my life and was just underwhelmed that these places were similar to America, not really an "other" like I had assumed they might be.

As I was trying to find various advertisements for foreign countries that I have seen on TV, etc., I came across instead an Absolut ad made by a Mexican advertising company. It struck me as very important and so I figured I would post it here. It is of the Mexican border as it was before the Mexican-American War of 1848 when Mexico had much more land (CA, TX, etc.). Then of course it says "In an Absolut World." I just thought this was a clever advertising campaign considering the fact that Mexico wants their land back and these advertisers were clever enough to point this out in an ad campaign. I just found it very interesting and it shows the way things used to be and how in an ideal world that is how they would be, but because of the power and influence of the United States, that will never happen. Also because Absolut has some wild advertising campaigns and this is yet another example.

2009-11-13T10:08:00.000-08:00

Our brief discussion about orientalism and exoticism made me think immediately of Gwen Stefani's "Harajuku Lovers" line and her Japanese-themed album LAMB (with accompanying "Harajuku Girl" entourage). I think this is one of the perfect examples of taking a culture completely out of context and revamping or even Americanizing it in order to fit our ideal interpretation (dare I say, fetish?). Harajuku is often regarded as Japan's fashion capital, a place where young people dress up in various different styles and gather together. However, having friends who participate in keeping up with the funky Japanese trends and also having been to Harajuku myself, I feel as if Stefani's interpretation of the Harajuku street fashion grossly misrepresents the culture itself. Her Japanese entourage (which she named Love, Angel, Music and Baby) obediantely accompany her everywhere, decked out in Stefani's idea of Harajuku fashion. As written in an article I once read titled "Gwenihana" by MiHi Anh, "She's taken Tokyo hipsters, sucked them dry of all their street cred, and turned them into

China

dolls." (PS: In the Harajuku Fragrance advertisement, what's wrong with using an Asian model if they're so into depicting Japanese culture??!!)

Gwenihana Link

The Male Gaze and Gossip Girl

2009-11-13T09:22:00.000-08:00

Probably many of you watched this week's Gossip Girl and saw the infamous threesome that happened between the characters of Olivia, Dan and Vanessa. This week we were talking in class about the male gaze and how it affects the media we are surrounded with and I feel like this show is an example of that. What is interesting about this show is the fact that it is originally targeted to females, yet somehow the advertising and the recurring plot of this show as the seasons go by seems to feed to a male audience. As many of you may know, a threesome with two girls is any male's #1 fantasy and by Gossip Girl including this in their plot this season we can see how the male gaze is taking charge of what happens in this show.
Another example of this is the controversial advertisements the network used for the premiere of last season. In these advertisements many screen shots of overtly sexual scenes from the show were used along with quotes from many newspapers criticizing the obscene nature of the show. By these advertisements showing obscene and sexual scenes from the show we can see how the male gaze dominates what is being put on in the media, even for shows that are supposed to be targeted to young females.

Gaga Hysteria

2009-11-13T09:08:00.000-08:00

I know Margo just did a Lady Gaga post, but I'm looking at another aspect of her brand. Her newest music video for "Bad Romance" was just released a couple days ago. At first I thought it was innovative in a bizarre and zany way, but after watching the 'behind-the-scenes' of the making of the video I'm actually appalled.
It's difficult to accurately explain the video, and I will sound like a crazy person if I try.
The main premise, which I completely overlooked initially because I was overwhelmed by how much was going on in the video, is the fact that Lady Gaga is performing to be sold to a male bidder. This made me think about our discussion regarding the Hottentot Venus. Although Lady Gaga's situation is not the same, at all, it still normalizes the notion that women are literal objects and can be bought an sold even in a fictional music video. During the second verse of the song, Lady Gaga is dancing provocatively wearing next to nothing for a group of men. At one point goes as far as to provide a lap dance for one of the men.
Finally, the man decides to purchase her and in the final scenes she sets their bed on fire, killing him. The last shot is decidedly creepy. Lady Gaga is laying on the incinerated bed, next to the burnt skeleton of the man who purchased her, dressed provocatively, with sparks flying out of her bra.
One can argue that it is empowering for women because at the end Lady Gaga cannot deal with being bought and sold. However, I think it perpetuates the image of hysterical women. Instead of rebelling against her slavehood in any other way, she blows up their bed killing the man. This idea is repeatedly seen in the media. When a man kills his wife he is seen as a heartless, vicious murderer. When a woman kills her husband she is seen as hysterical and crazy.
Now, millions of people will watch this video thinking it is Lady Gaga at her best and quirkiest, when really its a video displaying the objectification of women and their misguided hysteria.

Behind the scenes video

Black Representation

2009-11-13T08:52:00.000-08:00

In class this week we learned about how Black's are represented in society and how certain stereotypes are associated with them. In order to be sexy and attractive, black people need to have big butts and huge hips that give them the curve in their figure. Men look for those qualities when they look at black women but they only have this set ideology because that is what is stressed in the media. That is all they see so they stereotype black women into those categories. For example Beyonce, has the ideal black women body figure. She is known to be extremely talent but is also praised for her sex appeal and how she can shake her butt.
Another black female who was praised for her sex appeal was Tina Turner. In the 90's Tina Turner was a talented singer who needed to still appear her sexual body parts to become famous in the U.S. In her poster, she has big boobies and a very thin figure while having huge hair. Big hair was associated with black women and was known to be sexy. If you look at Tina Turners style she wore clothes that were very low cut and short which showed off her legs and boobies. For black women in the 90s sex appeal was necessary to become famous or no one appreciated or looked at them.

2009-11-13T04:52:00.001-08:00

The New Reeboks commercial for the Easytone shoe, which supposedly “helps you get better legs and a better butt with every single step” has a very strong male gaze. The commercial revolves around a woman pacing around a room in short-shorts and describing the changes with which these shoes provide the wearer. However the camera constantly zooms in on the woman’s butt region while she is speaking. Hence the commercial does not shy away from what it is really promoting. The camera physical forces the viewers gaze onto the woman’s buttocks region, inhibiting the viewer to look anywhere else. While the short-shorts are enough to draw the attention to that region of the woman’s body, the actual manipulation of the frame through which the viewer is looking disregards everything else going on in the commercial and places all focus on the females butt.

When I went to the Reeboks website there was another commercial that is a dialog between a woman’s breasts. The camera is zoomed-in to a woman’s chest region and implies that the dialog is coming from her breasts. It discusses how the woman’s breasts are now jealous because her butt is getting all the attention from spectators due to her use of the Easytone shoes. This insinuates that theses are the two regions that get the most attention on the female body and that the female physical appearance is all that matters.

Finally the main page image that goes along with the shoes is a naked female figure that is only covered in her lower region with a pair of Easytone sneakers. The body is very thin but there is a major emphasis on its curves near the buttocks.

Is it just me or is Reeboks trying to change its “image” and clientele? It is apparent that the company is attempting to appeal to a younger age group by promoting sex appeal. The entire website and commercial revolved around a certain body type that is deemed sexually appealing by the woman’s male counterpart. The camera in the commercial is clearly held and controlled by a man who manipulates the screen to just focus on the woman’s buttocks. The woman’s breasts are “jealous” because the woman’s buttock’s region is getting more attention from men. Thus Reeboks Easytone shoe inevitably was created for the male enjoyment.

It is also interesting to note that when I went to get a photo of the Reeboks image (the larger image attached at the top of this post), I also found another version of the image with the woman wearing underwear (the smaller image at the top).

http://www.reebok.com/microsites/easytone_reebok/

Stefani Germanotta

2009-11-11T22:05:00.000-08:00

We all know the Lady Gaga who sings "Pokerface," and "Lovegame," and who does crazy performances like at the VMAs and wears the most ridculous outfits (like oats made from Kermit the Frog) but little actually know of Stefani Germonotta, the woman behind Lady Gaga. I kind of see Stefani Gemonotta as the Clark Kent, and Lady Gaga as the superman, the person who we all know, but at the same time is hidden behind this sort of front. Stefani Gemonotta was actually an NYU student, who studied music. In a weird way, she was one of us. She lived at Third North, and performed in the Ultra Violet Live (where apparently she came in 2nd place). On youtube, there are clips of Stefani Gemonotta performing in 2006 when she was a student here, and she is definitely no Lady Gaga. Her sound is different, she has long brown hair, she's wearing actual clothes. She looks like a person who could sit next to you in any of your classes, or stand next to you on a ride in the Silver elevator. There is another clip of her when she appeared on MTV's show Boiling Points, and she definitely does not seem like this crazy zany person we have come to know. In fact, she comes off as a typical moody college kid.

But when we watch Lady Gaga I think that the Stefani Gemonotta is lost. I feel that Lady Gaga was created by Gemonotta because there are so many Gemonotta's out there: average college kids who can sing and write music. But there are really no other Lady Gagas- she is the Madonna of recent years, providing a shock value that Gemonotta did not. In turn, I feel that Lady Gaga was an image perfected by Gemonotta in an attempt to stand out and get recognized. And it definitely worked- people everywhere talk about her and her craziness. But I think it is important to realize that when it comes down to it, Lady Gaga is just an image created by some typical college kid looking to stand out in a world where it's not an easy thing to accomplish. And to her credit, it definitely worked, but one has to wonder what Stefani Germanotta gave up when she became Lady Gaga.

Video Clips of Stefani Germonotta:
-Performing in 2006 at the Bitter End: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b2C20qN4Ps
-On MTV's "Boiling Points" in 2005: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SIK-yzlxiU

Video Clip about Lady Gaga at the VMAs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRV0w7aW8vI&feature=fvw

Eminem: The Quintessential Antiauthority Rebel

2009-11-11T21:01:00.000-08:00

Jackson Katz’s article, Advertising and the Construction of Violent White Masculinity: From Eminem to Clinique for Men, points to the controversy of violence and media. Katz notes, “In recent years, academics, community activists, and politicians have increasingly been paying attention to the role of the mass media in producing, reproducing, and legitimating this violence. Unfortunately, however, much of the mainstream debate about the effects of media violence on violence in the “real” world fails to include an analysis of gender” (349). Nevertheless, gender plays a pivotal role in advertising, and the appeal of violent behavior for men is often incorporated into mainstream advertising.

What I thought was really interesting about this article was the notion of “the angry, aggressive, White working-class male as antiauthority rebel.” Katz speaks of male icons in the music industry that embody all sorts of violent angers and resentments, seeking validation in the defiance of middle-class manners and social conventions. In particular, Katz highlights rap artist Eminem, who since the 90s, has been skillfully marketed to young males (especially White boys), as an anti-authority rebel. In all of Eminem’s CD covers and any medium featuring his face for that matter, he is always portrayed with scowls and “looks of grim seriousness.” Although these faces don’t necessarily promote violent activities among young males, they encourage “in-your-face” behavior that can easily escalate into real-life violence. Katz notes, “…because his crude profanity offends a lot of parents, kids can ‘rebel’ against their parents’ wishes by listening to him, buying his CDs, and so on” (353). Eminem’s image has therefore taken on this persona as being rebellious.

Ironically enough, when I was in the airport this past June, I hit up the Hudson News stand and glanced through VIBE magazine, which featured Eminem on the cover. He was sporting his default scowl, lips practically puckered, with his arms crossed. After reading this article, I looked up pictures of Eminem’s CD covers, from his earlier projects to his most recent CD “Relapse” and well, I have to say Jackson Katz’s point was proven – every single one of Eminem’s CDs on which his face was featured had him doing his usual frown with his eyes glaring right at you. I am convinced. Eminem’s expression feeds right into the concept of constructions of violent White masculinity in the media.

Here is a selection of his CD covers:

Lady Gaga is a Freak and I Love Her

2009-11-10T14:33:00.000-08:00

The video to Lady Gaga's new single "Bad Romance" just came out, and it is seriously something to behold. As usual, it opens with Gaga sitting in a chair surrounded by creepy, sexualized bodies wearing some crazy eyewear. The music video then goes on to show a certain resurrection of these odd alien creatures (that of course sing and dance). This might be a representation of her past failed romances, but the one thing that stuck out to me throughout the whole video was just what we have been talking about in class: the idea of orientalism and exoticism. In art, we generally talk about the portrayal of scenes like the Ottoman Harem as being very exotic, with this ignorant view fueled by colonial empires in the 18th and 19th centuries, but Gaga is going for something a little different. Instead of going for something that we can all recognize as iconic and taking a new view on it (i.e. Beyonce's "Single Ladies" as a remake of Bob Fosse's and Gwen Verdon's "Cupid Shuffle"), she uses herself as an exotic entity with ambiguous intentions. This is true to Gaga's style in creating something cutting edge, but when does being exotic and provocative turn into something that makes entirely no sense? If I had to really deconstruct the video and identify themes or ideas, I could easily make two valid cases. The video equally depicts Lady Gaga's failed relationships as it does a Martian landing on earth, and when the meaning is that misconstrued, how can she expect an audience to be affected by anything other than it's weirdness?

Having said that, I still think it's a cool music video worth putting on repeat and dancing to. Here's the link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACm9yECwSso. And for anybody who is interested, this is the link to the dance that "Single Ladies" was created from - it's easy to see the similarities: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9irO41BUXw&feature=related

Dear Ketel One Drinker

2009-11-09T19:52:00.000-08:00

In Chapter 8 of “Practices of Looking,” Sturken and Cartwright explain postmodernism and popular culture. I only recently learned exactly what postmodernism is in my communications classes, and one thing I have recently found very interesting is postmodern advertising. Essentially, the company uses texts that speak to the viewer as subjects who know about the codes and conventions of representation. This form of advertising speaks to consumers as if there is a mutual understanding between the consumer and company, as if the company is saying to the viewer, “We know you know we’re advertising right now.” The postmodern form takes the viewer to be someone who won’t be fooled by techniques of propaganda or illusionism, but instead as someone who will get the reference and who is image and media savvy.

A recent ad campaign that is utilizing this post modern tactic in an extreme way is Ketel One’s ads that are all just a few words on paper. In Ketel One’s signature font, they say things like “Dear Ketel One Drinker, Can you find the subliminal message in this advertisement?” or “Dear Ketel One Drinker, Thank You,” and the remainder of the page is completely blank. This ad campaign has been the subject of a lot of criticism, and people have said they find the ads annoying, but it works for two reasons. One is that Ketel One is a recognizable brand and people are familiar with both the name and the font, and the second is that Ketel One is mocking advertising while advertising, assuming that the viewer will understand.

Vodka is essentially an empty commodity, a clear substance that does not really taste like anything, so vodka sells based on the image that it promotes, and is almost strictly based on the branding and marketing of the product. Ketel One has taken a postmodern approach with its advertising, assuming that the viewer is knowledgeable, informed, and not blindly influenced by the marketing they see. I think that this type of postmodern advertising is interesting, because Ketel One is spending so much money to leave ¾ of each page or billboard blank. This is a bold move, and I do think that people can recognize it as witty and therefore appreciate it. Rather than using bold images or topics, these ads are subtle and smart. Keep an eye out for these ads- they’re in subways now and some billboards, and whether you love them or hate them, they’re pretty interesting to see because they’re so different than the in your face advertisements that tend to scream out to reach viewers.

Getting their paws on our views

2009-11-08T19:48:00.000-08:00

We are affected by hegemony even in the aspect of pets. Seen in television shows, commercials, movies and etc. there is always the perfect yellow lab or golden retriever. It's embedded in peoples minds to want one of these dogs. Even from childhood we are exposed to this appeal. It's often seen in movies, when the kids open a christmas box that actually has a puppy in it, it's generally a tiny lab or retriever. They are portrayed as the most cute, perfect, adventurous, cuddly dogs. Some key examples are:

Comet from full house:

The Cottonelle commercials:

In "Ai rBud" which brought about "Air Buddies" as well

In "Marley and Me"

The list is endless, I'm sure you have many examples of your own that you remember. My point is just that , even areas of our lives that seem petty and unimportant cannot escape hegemonic ideas and subliminal control.

The Male Gaze in Holiday Marketing

2009-11-06T21:43:00.000-08:00

If you have taken the subway to Time Square-42nd Street in the last two weeks and looked up, you may have noticed that Target had begun posting its giant holiday posters. They are a modernized version of the twelve days of Christmas with substituting Target’s products for the material objects and humans for the animals. For example, the eight lords-a-leaping poster features eight dapper looking young men leaning forward, giving winning smiles to the spectator. The seven swans-a-swimming depicts children cavorting. These both seem relatively light-hearted, but then one notices the six geese-a-laying one. It displays six nearly identical blonde women pushing baby carriages.

It is the only ad posted yet that features adult women, and its implications are that their sole purpose is to be breeding birds. While swans are considered to be beautiful, graceful, even virginal creatures, geese are known for their monogamous instincts, the imprinting of the goslings on the mother, and for being a traditional Christmas dish.

It is my thought that the male gaze is particularly present these posters by displaying the men as handsome, winsome creatures while diluting woman to their most base physiological purpose—to give birth to children or to lay eggs. Furthermore, all the women are blonde, leggy, dressed in white, and are pushing pearly, almost egg-shaped carriages. The only touch of Target’s signature scarlet is in the background, causing the subjects to look even more pure by comparison.

I wonder if in the coming weeks will Target debut other “Days” posters and exactly how different their nine ladies dancing will be from their six geese, or will they have to acknowledge that their stylized version of womanhood is decidedly one dimensional?

Hegemony In Broadway

2009-11-06T21:31:00.000-08:00

So last night I watched Chicago the musical and surprisingly it was not that good. It might have been the cast but the musical did not blow my mind at all. It was not good as good as the New York Times had hyped it up to be at all. The characters in the show were not as talented as I thought and their voices as well did not blow my mind. It was kind of a shocker, I had paid about $80 dollars to see this musical and didn't feel the quality was worthy paying for. And I started to wonder if we just like musicals because it is what the upper-class like to watch and enjoy in their leisure time. The rich spend tons of money getting the perfect seat for the spectacular musical and get dressed up all fancy to watch these shows. Do we really enjoy the musical, ballets and operas we attend? Or is it just the act of going to musical and telling people that we watched a musical?

The way the rich think definitely influences peoples action. Because the rich make an object, TV show or sports activity so fun and high class, we want to do these things as well. In a materialistic world I feel Americans strive to be rich and act rich when in reality they may not enjoy the things the rich are really doing. It just looks good.

The Male Gaze

2009-11-06T21:06:00.000-08:00

As we talked about in class, the male gaze shapes the way woman think they should look in public. If it wasn't for the male gaze, I feel most women would not care what they looked like in public. It seems men evaluate women for how they look from head to toe. Although men try to justify their side by stating that what they really care about in a woman is their personality, I don't believe its true. How are so many good looking men with such good looking women? Did they all have the a plus personality and character? The males have a fixed view on the type of woman they want to marry and since woman are trying to get married, they are fixed into conforming into the images men want.
Today, it seems women are justified as being beautiful when they are sexually appealing, otherwise they are just considered cute. A woman needs to be stick skinny while having big boobs and a behind like Beyonce. This figure is not realistic but since it is highly emphasized in advertisements, men are persuaded into believing that those traits are what make women hot. Celebrities like Megan Fox and Angelina Jolie are praised in society for having the hottest bodies. They are a lot of young girls ideal body type and many girls strive to become this image. I feel it is almost all because of the male gaze.

Consciousness

2009-11-06T19:33:00.000-08:00

After rereading DuBois's statement on double consciousness. While its an interesting concept with many examples I am beginning to realize that individuals' entire lives are formed and lived through a double consciousness. When DuBois says "it is a peculiar sensation, this double consciousness, this sense of always looking at one's self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity." I feel like it can apply to any ideology because the state and media have particular agendas which we feel we must abide by, or at least strive to emulate. On a grand scale, yes, I'd imagine the double consciousness associated with being an educated African American is deeply felt, but I also believe that it affects everyone in multiple ways. For example, a working mother may even have quadruple consciousness. Based on her position in corporate America, arguably a "man's world," and among her peers at a her daughter's Saturday morning soccer game, proud of bringing the requisite Dunkin Donuts Munchkins and hot cocoa. She constantly measures herself against the ideals of both realms, yet consistently feels like she never measures up. So its not just being a black man and an American, it can also be a gay man and an autoracer.

Moving to a completely different thought, I decided to watch Oprah this week because she is a great example of a person with double consciousness. A couple days ago Hilary Swank was on the show promoting her new film about Amelia Earhart. She introduced Swank as an accomplish two-time Oscar winner, and the conversation that ensued was graceful, eloquent, and full of intelligent vernacular with a "classy" tone. Basically, it sounded like what the American public would consider "white." Conversely, today Oprah spoke with Mo'Nique, a talented black actress who was promoting her new film "Precious." I was not very surprised when Oprah started speaking with a particular twang, and using words such as 'girl' and 'okay' with a certain emphasis that would be considered black. She also was not speaking grammatically correct during some of the conversation, but this was definitely not meant derogatorily. I think a lot of this is not only double consciousness but more a unconscious attempt to 'relate' to her guests and subsequently set the stage for the viewer regarding the relationship between Oprah and her guest.