Justin Beiber

So, I've got a little topic I'd kind of like to rant about.
Justin Bieber.
Anyone who is a fan of Bieber, I apologize if what I write here offends you. Frankly, I'm offended by the little pop wonder himself. I want to tell you a little story about J.B... so bear with me.

A few years ago, before I had my son, I used to hang out at the Stratford Youth Centre with my son's father Taylor. Both of us are musically inclined and Taylor used to play guitar for the other youth sometimes. All of us enjoyed it... all of us except Bieber. That kid used to insult Taylor, insult me, insult all of my friends. He was self-centred and ignorant, and he made everyone feel awful about themselves whenever he came around (which, thankfully, wasn't too often). He told one of my friends that she had "donkey teeth" (amoung other things) and made her cry for a week. Mhm... he's SOOOOO sweet! (sarcasm)

One of my best friends, Samantha Mckiel, competed with Bieber in Stratford Star (run through the youth centre)... I watched him perform long before he got famous, because I was there to support Sam. To be honest, all I could think about when I watched him sing his juvinile boy-band song about Basketball was that I hoped he would fail in his musical career just so he'd be knocked down a peg. The opposite has obviously happened. This kid, who made so many people feel awful about themselves, is now a million dollar star living in the south... and frankly, fame hasn't helped him gain any sense of reality or humilty at all, it's done the opposite.

In some of his interviews Bieber has failed to even acknowledge Stratford at all, or it's role in his climb to fame. In another interview, he finally DID mention Stratford... but had the audacity to say he was the first person to get famous from here! Let me clear that up... here's a list of all the famous people I know of that have come from Stratford (several of which were mentioned to Bieber... he didn't know who any of them were):

Colm Feore (festival actor, has played roles in several films including The Chronicals of Riddick)
Lloyd Robertson (CBC anchor and actor)
Shawn Roberts (actor)
Dayna Manning (musician)
Steve Joles (world famous sound mixer-recorder)
Richard Manuel (musician, from The Band)
Cynthia Belliveau (actor)

Loreena McKennet lived in Stratford, Timothy Findley lived in Stratford, even THOMAS EDISON worked in Stratford for a short time. Tim Taylor got his start here, as did many others. If Bieber honestly thinks he's the first "big thing" to come from this town... someone needs to give him a smack upside the head, or at very least remove the wool (or rather, really AWFUL looking bangs) from his eyes.

(In all seriousness, that kid needs a haircut, he's had that style for years... think he can afford some scissors with his mansions and cars... that he can't drive....)

I take comfort in one thing, and while this sounds terrible I'm being completely honest... in a couple years that kid's voice is going to crack, and that'll be the end of it. Maybe then, just maybe, he'll have the bloody compassion to apologize to all the people he treated like crap back here.

Sorry, end rant.

Language, language!

In several of my peers blogs I've noticed a recurring theme. Language. Some of my classmates agree that the bad language in the media is just "too much," others have resigned themselves to the idea that such language is just a part of our culture and cannot be avoided. I'd like to give my opinion on the subject.

First of all, swearing is NOT a natural part of our language. People have taken words that used to have completely different meanings (i.e. slut used to mean a candle holder) and turned them into insults. It's unnecessary, and half of it doesn't even make SENSE!

Second of all, CHILDREN! Yes, it is the parent's responsibility to sheild their children from R rated films and music written in poor taste... but it's society's responsibility to make that possible for the parents to do! When you drive down the street blasting Eminem on top volume... do you take into consideration the small children walking home from school? Kids are like sponges... I would know. My three year old gets on the bus with me every morning, and we're surrounded by teengers on their way to school. You would be amazed at the words he picks up on a half-hour bus ride from our apartment to his daycare. Can you imagine the embarassment of dropping him off with his teachers one morning and hearing him repeat things like "f***" or "bulls***" when the kid isn't even old enough to spell his own name yet? How does that make ME look as his parent? I can't avoid him hearing those things unless other people help as well.

My opinion is this. If you want to swear, listen to inappropriate music or share a film on your iphone on top volume, do so in an appropriate setting. I'm not going to say that I never let a bad word slip out when I stub my toe at home (or, more recently, spill an entire glass of grape juice on my freshly cleaned carpet), but you're not going to hear me standing in front of a bunch of small children cursing like there's no tomorrow. Respect the people around you! Turn down your music, and turn down the dial on your OWN volume as well. Little kids don't need to hear that, and frankly... it doesn't make you look like you've got a good grasp of the english language when you f**king talk like f**king this about every f**king thing.

End rant.

"Torture Porn"

The current discussion in our class is about horror or gore films. I'm going to admit something right now... I can't stand horror films. I get scared so easily that I can't sit through 15 minutes of a film like Seven. I threw up when I watched Hostel, couldn't sleep for nights after I watched The Ring. I'm a scardy-cat.

Chances are, you can blame that on my parents.
My parents were very protective of me when I was a child. We didn't have cable, didn't watch television at all. The only time I watched t.v. was while I was staying with my grandparents or at a friends house. When we rented movies they were children's films or family friendly. My Mom threw a minor fit when she found out I watched the movie "Matilda" because it dealt with child abuse.

Of course, they lessened their hold on me as I got older, we watched documentaries about more disturbing events, a few suspense movies, even a couple scary ones... but I never got into horror. It disturbed me far too much, and has always seemed completely unnecessary. My Dad calls films like Saw or Hostel "torture porn," and I agree with him. It's sick. Anyone who can find enjoyment in a bloodbath of violence, rape, etc. is either so desensitized that they forget that murder, rape and other horrors DO happen to people and it ISN'T entertaining, or they're just disturbed. I don't blame my parents for protecting me, and frankly, I'm glad they did. No child needs to see people being torn limb from limb. We're supposed to protect our children from the bad things in the world, not expose them to it all.

This may seem a bit contradictory to people who know me, considering my obsession with the Second World War and the Holocaust. I watch films about the Nazi concentration camps, read book after book and article after article about the horrors that ensued during the years of the war. Make no mistake... I take NO pleasure or entertainment from the terrible suffering of so many people at the hands of the Germans. My interest is purely educational, always has and always will be.

Horror and gore are unnecessary. Sure, make a film with suspense, mystery, even murder... but don't go overboard. Nobody NEEDS to see that (and if you feel you do... you may want to seek some help).

Social Networking Sites

Facebook.
Everybody uses it. Teenagers, adults, even some seniors. It's the most popular social networking site in North America, and for good reason. No site reconnects you with old friends and family the way Facebook does, and it allows you to share the happenings of your day to day life at your convenience.

However, there are a few things that Facebookers don't seem to realize about the site. For instance, every time you upload a photo you are giving the site the right's to that photo. They own it, and continue to even after you delete your account. Same goes for the notes you write, and the information about yourself that you post. Facebook immediately has the right to re-publish all your information for their own purposes (advertising, etc).

So, for those of you who rush home to change your status every day after school, and upload photos from your most recent date night... keep in mind that it's something that won't be deleted for a long, long time to come.

Differences Between Fiction and Film

I recently finished reading the novel "White Oleander" and then followed up my reading by watching the movie at home. What an incredible difference! Amazing, how Astrid's mother changed from an author, a poet in the book, to a visual artist in the film. Not only were the characters altered, but entire sections of the plot were eliminated in the movie. I was honestly dumbstruck by the difference, and disappointed as well.

Having said that, I certainly understand that turning fiction into film is a challenge, and using every detail from the book would ultimately result in a five hour movie (an audience of sore behinds), which is not ideal. The producers and directors of White Oleander certainly did a good job, it's a beautiful film that pulls the audience's heart strings just as much as the written work does. It's simply a shame that so much gets "lost in translation" between fiction and film.

There are many examples of this found in media. Even such works as Dante's Inferno are now being used for movies and video games. The unfortunate issue with this is that the entire story is changed to the point where it becomes unrecognizable. Some people might argue that these alterations are necessary to appeal to the audience, to keep the stories alive, but at what cost? When does it become too much, and when do we recognize that we're simply slandarizing great literary work? Maybe never, but hopefully soon, before every book and poem is an inaccurate film or game depiction.

Students of Tomorrow

The students of tomorrow are going to be even more bombarded by technology and media than we are. More and more courses will be offered online, a big help to students who have difficulty attending a regular school but bad news for teachers who will be put out of jobs. As tools such as smart boards become more popular and accessable, chalkboards and textbooks will be on their way out. These things will benefit those who are technologically literate, but those who struggle with operating computers and other mechanics will not progress to their full capacity. As well, were some disaster to wipe out (temporarily or permanently) the technology being used, students would not be prepared or able to take care of themselves or continue their lives productively because of the reliance they will have built on computers, internet, and other techy gadgets. It's an inevitable disaster, it's just waiting to happen.

Superbowl Commercial Cost

I have no doubt what so ever that the people developing the commercials for the Superbowl, and the companies benefitting from the advertisements, believe that it is worth three million dollars for 30 seconds... after all, hundreds of thousands of people sit on their butts and watch the game, and will be exposed to those advertisements... which definitely impacts the consumer market for the products being advertised. However, I look at things from a more realistic point of view, so I disagree.

Three million dollars for thirty seconds? Three million dollars, if you have to use it for advertising, could go a lot farther than one commercial. You could create billions of flyers, do hundreds of commercials during non-Superbowl time... any number of things. I'm not sure of exact statistics, but I'm willing to bet that doubling your advertising during off-season would gain you just as many customers as one commercial during a football game.

Furthermore, with disasters such as the earth quake in Haiti, I think that there are a lot more important things to focus the world's money on than Budweiser. I guess that's not really relavent to the media though....

It's obvious that the reason a commercial during the Superbowl costs so much is that it is one of the biggest games of the year, and has the largest audience to broadcast to. As well, it's necessary to make the commercials entertaining and eye-catching, to stand out amoung the dozens of other commercials aired during that time. Worth it though? I think not... especially since, not being a football fan, I don't benefit at all from that 3 million... I've got no idea what trendy new products they're advertising and I know a lot of other people who won't either.

Media Meanings and Me

Each individual person brings their own meaning to a piece of media. My opinions about what a particular film is supposed to mean may vary considerably from Jacob's. Here are a few films and my opinions about them.

http://www.nfb.ca/film/vistas_little_thunder

This first film is based on an Aboriginal tale, about a boy setting out on a cross country canoe trip to become a man. I really enjoyed this film, I thought that it was very humourous and I liked the native style animation. Having said that, someone who doesn't know very much about Aboriginal culture, or would have trouble following the very busy, hectic animation, might not enjoy it as much as I did and may have interpreted the meaning behind it in a way much different from my own.

http://www.nfb.ca/film/girl_who_hated_books/

This film is actually based on a children's book that I've read to my son many times. I've always enjoyed this story, and I think the producers of the film did a great job with it. I think a lot of other students might be bored by it, but since I am a mother I have an appreciation for children's stories, because I am exposed to them every night.

http://www.nfb.ca/film/erlKing

I could not finish this film. Not because of it's length or because I didn't enjoy the style or music, but because I found the content too disturbing. As a mother, any subject matter to do with the harm or murder of children is appalling to me. Other teenagers my age are so used to slash, blood and gore that they might enjoy the story of the ErlKing, or even find it "lame" because it is not nearly as graphic as "Saw" per say. However, to me it is extremely scary, because I can picture my son as the little boy in the story.

Take a look at those videos... do you like them? Are your opinions different from mine? It's almost guaranteed that they will be. No two people are the same in their opinons, thought processes, or (as this pertains to the above) the meanings that they bring to the media they are exposed to.

Media Constructed Reality

We've recently taken a look at the phenomenon of C.S.I., and how it fits into the second key concept of media, that media constructs reality. Watching both an episode of the show and an episode of Oprah focusing on C.S.I. we analyzed how the producers of this hit crime show try to make it as close to reality as possible, as well as how (despite their efforts) it's quite obvious that it is a construction (i.e. through the credits, mood music, time lapses).

Well, C.S.I. certainly is popular, with it's several million fans, but I can think of an example of the second key concept that affected almost as many people... and for many it was in a much more negative way.

On October 30th, 1938, the U.S.A. tuned into their radios and were shocked to hear about the arrival of martians (aliens) on planet earth. There was a widespread panic, many people fled, a few committed suicide. The majority of these people turned on the radio too late to hear the broadcaster say that what they would be listening to was a work of fiction, and meant only for entertainment. We know the story well, over seven decades later it remains a hit and was recently made into a movie.... The War of the World's.

Why did so many people have such a panicked reaction to this "construction of reality?" Well, part of the reason is that the audiences of media determine the meaning in what they see/hear, which I'll explore in my next blog. Another reason is that the radio broadcast was created to sound threatening and frightening, it was meant to be a scary story... and they took the "scare" tactic a little too far in their construction. This construction of reality had a more immediate effect than C.S.I., which has made changes to our court proceedures and our perception of crime scene invesigation over a period of time, however it is still an example of how media constructs reality... and society reacts to whatever reality is constructed for them.

Photoshop World... It's All A Lie

Over the last couple of days we've taken a fairly in depth look at photo manipulation in the media. This exploration has included the dissection of the Dove Evolutions Ad, several photos that have been altered for multiple reasons (i.e. O.J. Simpson's photo made darker to look more menacing) and the false advertising of one particular beach through the use of stock photos. To be honest, the advertisement for the beach didn't bother me much. It showed a woman in a bathing suit in front of a shoreline. While I didn't agree with the company's reasons for using a stock photo (cutting cost, which proved to be untrue) I think that since the focus of the photo was the woman in the swim wear rather than the scenery it really doesn't deserve a great deal of fuss.

Having said that, I've found some of the other photo manipulation extremely disturbing. For instance, taking a photo of Julia Robert's face and putting it on a picture of her body from five years ago. Robert's is attractive enough, there's no need for that. I've found a few more examples, shown below, in which the changes made are entirely unnecessary and incredibly extreme. Look at these photos of Kiera Knightly. In the original she is extremely flat chested, her eyes are wider, her eyebrows are slightly more unruly, and she has less muscle definition. In the edited photo all those things, along with the over all colour of the photo, are completely altered. Certainly it is necessary to change the photo for the publicity of the film (King Arthur), generally to draw the audience's eye to the poster is was used for... but to change her chest from an A cup (maybe) to a B or C? That was not needed. She was beautiful before hand, and more natural looking. I highly doubt that people in King Arthur's time looked as though they were wearing a pound of makeup... why make her look like a clown when her face already suited the part? Take a look for yourself.



Now, take a look at this one, which is NOT for a movie poster, but instead for a magazine cover. In the "before" picture Kirsten Dunst is already a small size, with pretty features and beautiful skin. In the "after" shot she looks as though she has been molded like a barbie doll and left in the sun too long. Her hip bones jut out, her face looks burned, and she's magically lost about ten pounds off of her already petite frame. Necessary? No. She was beautiful before.



Our perception of beauty is being completely skewed by this type of manipulation. Our perception of everything is being manipulated by media. Certainly there are companies that are trying to reverse this problem, for instance the Dove campaign... however such efforts are difficult to take seriously when you look at the fact that Dove and Axe (a company which exploits women as objects in their advertising) are under the same management. It's sickening. Yet another reason why I don't buy magazines and don't watch television. The only magazine I do read (Today's Parent) is even guilty of manipulation. For crying out loud, children are beautiful as they are. Take a look at this picture of my son and tell me he's not worth putting on a cover, without adding a pound of make up and altering his cheekbones!



Photoshop is fun, when you use it just for kicks, but I think it's time the world sees things as they truly are... not as they are after 10 hours in a studio.

My Media (In)Dependence

Having finished the media consumption survey I've now been instructed to post an entry about the results, and about my independence and/or dependence on certain forms of media.

Compared to my peers, I think my dependence on any given form of media is very minimal. I live on my own, and have chosen not to invest in cable or satellite television, which means that I am not subject to the daily bombardment of television advertisements that people waste so much money on. We own movies (mostly children's films for my son), and if we want to watch a particular show we rent it on DVD. I hate the way television affects people's lives, convincing them to buy things and be at home to watch a show at a certain time, T.V. even plays babysitter for some people's children! I see no reason to have that in my home.

Cellphones are another form of media that I am in no way dependent on. I do not own a functioning cell phone, and while I think it would be beneficial for me to use one it is not a necessity. Cell phone bills are far too high, and when you're paying $730.00 per month for rent, on top of the costs of diapers, groceries and bills you don't have the money to spare. It sickens me, as well, that cell phone companies charge people for text messaging when a recent study showed that it costs the companies nothing to transmit text messages from phone to phone. It's ridiculous. Perhaps someday, when I'm making forty dollars an hour, I'll be able to afford to pay those companies for their rip-offs, but not right now.

The types of media I am at least moderately dependent on are few. I use the internet for school work, and for occasional socializing. I also use it for my own personal research. Newspapers I rely on for the news (obviously) as well as real estate rental openings, job offerings and other important information. I use music players (radio, sterio, Mp3 player) frequently, I am a music lover and almost always have something playing. I don't consider books part of the "mass media", but since the survey did I have to say that they are the form of media I am most dependent on. I read for pleasure, for research, for school, and to my son. They are an asset to psychological learning and development, and as such we have book cases in every room that are packed with everything from historical documentations to Dr. Suess.

Over all I really don't think I am incredibly dependent on the media. I could go without almost every form of it, with the exception of books. I don't know what's going on with Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, and I really don't care. It doesn't matter to me what conspiracies are going around about Michael Jackson's death and I can't tell you what a McDonald's is advertising on television these days. None of those things, amoung many others, are important to my day to day life. Three cheers for non media consumption!