The Wire

The Wire was a 5 season HBO series.  It premiered on June 2, 2002.  The Wire was written by a former police reporter, David Simon.  Each episode focuses on a different facet of life in the city of Baltimore.  This show was has been described at the greatest television series ever made.  The Wire has become so critically acclaimed because of its real life depiction of life in Baltimore.  The show is based largely upon Simons 13 years working for the Baltimore Sun. 

Source:

http://www.hbo.com/the-wire/index.html#/the-wire/about/index.html

http://www.popmatters.com/pm/feature/116351-fast-train-to-nowhere-watching-the-wire-aesthetically

MySpace

MySpace was launched in August 2003.  Until June 2006 MySpace was the most visited site in the United States; it was surpassed by Google.  In 2008 MySpace was overtaken my Facebook in number of visitors.  As of December 2011, MySpace was ranked 123^rd by total web traffic.  In just over a year MySpace lots half of its audience.  One of the major reasons for MySpace’s decline is their fail to change or evolve over the years.  They stayed the same so people got bored.  MySpace also got bogged down in a big marketing contract which caused their site to run slow, while Facebook was allowed to flourish and evolve.  O and I’m sure the MySpace face didn’t help!

Facebook

Facebook was founded by Mark Zuckerberg, a student studying at Harvard University.  After creating a successful website called Fashmash, which allowed students to rate each other’s hotness, he started TheFacebook.  In August of 2005 it became simply Facebook.  Since then Facebook has become a social media giant, even beating Google in March 2010 in terms of traffic volume going through their site, though only for a week.  It is now estimated that Facebook is worth eleven billion dollars.  As of July 2011, Facebook has more than 800 million active users. 

Facebook has had a wide impact on today’s society.  It has influenced media by allowing advertisers to use influencers.  Influencers are people who ‘influence’ others in their purchasing decisions.  It tends to give products credibility and spreads word of mouth about the product.  Word of mouth is the best way to advertise a product. 

Sources:http://www.sexysocialmedia.com/the-history-of-facebook-how-facebook-came-to-be/

Will We Feel Empathy: Semester Summery

Will we feel empathy?

                Our technology is constantly evolving.  We are currently nearing a time where our technology may be able to create artificial intelligence much like ourselves.  Imagine a day when you wake up and there is a person living inside your computer screen (Larson).  This person can think, feel, and fear.  What do you do with them?  If this were to happen, would people feel empathy for this person?  Or instead would we turn off our computer and act like nothing ever happened?

Webster’s Dictionary defines empathy as “the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner; also: the capacity for this” (Merriam-Webster, Incorporated).  There is an old expression that states ‘walk a mile in their shoes,’ this is empathy.  Empathy is the act of placing yourself in another person’s situation. 

                At first I thought empathy was being able to feel for someone because you can, in some way, relate to them.  In this way, empathy was just a deeper level of sympathy.  With this very basic definition of empathy my first reaction was that humans would not feel empathy for the little person living in their computer screen.  We would not feel empathy because we cannot relate.  We would label this person as ‘other’ or different from us, therefore blocking our empathetic feelings.  However, there is something else humans feel called empathic concern. 

                Empathic concern seems to be a product of “(a) perception of another as in need and (b) intrinsic valuing of that other’s welfare. Contrary to what is often thought, empathic concern is not a product of perceived similarity of the other to the self. We do not simply feel for ourselves in the other. We can feel empathic concern for a wide range of others in need, even dissimilar others, as long as we value their welfare” (Batson).  According to this new definition, humans can feel empathy for something we cannot relate to or that is not like us.  The new question becomes will we value their welfare?

                I would like to say I can answer this question with a firm “yes” but the harsh reality is I cannot.  History has shown that we have not valued the welfare of many humans.  Human nature is to label people as ‘other’ creating them as less than human in our minds.  This makes their welfare not as important as ‘ours’ and the people like ‘us’.  We do this with humans who came into the world just like we did.  Now add in the debate about if the person living in your computer screen is really alive.  If we cannot care for the welfare of our own people, we will not be able to care for the welfare of a person living in our computer screens.  Dr. Seuss once said, “A person is a person, no matter how small.”  Although I desperately want to agree with him, I think society will have a different view upon this tiny person. 

Bibliography

Batson, Dan. "Empathic Concern and Altruism in Humans." 12 10 2009. On the Human. 1 12 2011.

Larson, Robert. Media Literacy Class 28 11 2011.

Larson, Robert. Media Literacy Class 30 11 2011.

Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. Empathy - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictonary. 2011. 1 12 2011.

Selling Hope: The Widespread Effects of Photoshop

Selling Hope: The Widespread Effects of Photoshop

                The goal in advertising is to sell hope.  Hope that by purchasing a particular product or service one will receive the desired result.  Hope this product will bring the same satisfaction it does to the people in the advertisement.  However, for many products, this result has become nearly impossible. 

            As little girls in America we are taught what is beautiful.  We are not only taught this expectation but are expected to fulfill it.  This beauty standard is nearly impossible to fulfill.  If one examines the Barbie doll, a classic representation of ideal beauty, the impractical nature of this beauty standard is easily revealed.  “Researchers generating a computer model of a woman with Barbie-doll proportions found that her back would be too weak to support the weight of her upper body, and her body would be too narrow to contain more than half a liver and a few centimeters of bowel. A real woman built that way would suffer from chronic diarrhea and eventually die from malnutrition” (Bisseil, K., & Rask, A.)  Jill Barad, president of Mattel, (which manufactures Barbie) estimated that 99% of girls aged 3 to 10 years old own at least one Barbie doll” (Morford, 2008).  However impossible this beauty may be, Barbie is still who many young girls compare themselves to. 

                The already nearly impossible standard of beauty has recently been skewed even further.  With the invention and widespread use of Photoshop, now only one percent of women can obtain our new standard (Bisseil & Rask, 2010).  It is estimated that, in a typical magazine, 99.9% of the images are Photoshopped (Bisseil & Rask, 2010).  This further distortion of beauty has led many to call into account its effects. 

                Some argue that we need a beauty standard to know what is socially acceptable.  According to Alkon, “We don’t say, ‘hey, you weren’t born a genius, so why ever bother reading a book? Why should we treat physical appearance any differently’” (2010)?  She argues the point that you do not need to look like the models in magazines, but women do need to keep up their appearance.  In her argument she states that there are certain characteristics that men and women are biologically drawn towards.  These ‘beauty standards’ are not placed in our minds by the media, but by biology.  According to biology, “beauty standards are cues to a woman’s health [such as]: clear, smooth skin; full lustrous hair; full lips; bright eyes; and symmetrical features” (Bisseil, K., & Rask, A.). 

                The unrealistic beauty standard affects everyone.  I focused my research on Caucasian, females living in America.  The most effected segment of this group is young girls and teenagers (Engeln-Maddox, 2006).  It is these young girls that are developing low self-esteem and eating disorders.  “In 2003, Teen magazine reported that 35 per cent of girls 6 to 12 years old have been on at least one diet, and that 50 to 70 per cent of normal weight girls believe they are overweight. Overall research indicates that 90% of women are dissatisfied with their appearance in some way” (Bisseil & Rask, 2010).

                I do not think it is possible to call for a ban of all Photoshopped images, nor do I think this is the correct solution.  Instead, I believe, consumers should be informed the image has been altered.  "Under the Federal Trade Commission Act, advertising must be truthful and non-deceptive” (PR Newswire, 2011).  Altering a photo to portray an unobtanable standard of beauty is deceptive.  By placing a label on the photo, stating that it has been altered, women will become more aware.  Although I believe this would be a step in the right direction, I do not know how much of an impact it would have on womens perception on beauty.  The image of ‘perfection’ will always be out there, and women will always be striving to obtain this look. 

                I think a big step that many advertisers have been doing, in recent years, is broadining the standard of beauty.  Many companies, such as Dove, have begun running campaigns that accept other women besides the size zero model as beautiful.  The one thing I really like about the Dove campaign is it not only aims to change the standard of beauty but it also aims to educate.  One of the focues in their campaign has to do with mothers educating their daughters.  Although  advertisers are constantly bombarding our lives with images of what it means to be beautiful, ultimately, it comes down to ones sense of self.  If one has been educated to love her body for herself, then I think that is the first step.  I do not believe this issue is all or nothing.  I think that women should strive to be the best that they can be.  However, when they take drastic measures, such as developing an eating disorder, that is when it becomes a problem. 

                Hope is something that drives a lot of our actions.  Every woman wants to be considered beautiful.  However, by using Photoshop in advertising, this ambition is anything but attainable.  These Photoshopped images present women with an impossible standard of beauty.  Until this standard is changed or women are more educated, the hope for achieving this standard is anything but possible. 

Bibliography

What do Kelly Clarkson, Kate Winslet and Mariah Carey have in common? (2009). Canada Newswire, 1.

Alkon, A. (2010). The truth about beauty. Psychology Today, 54-59.

Bisseil, K., & Rask, A. (2010). Real women on real beauty: Self-discrepancy, internalisation of the thin ideal, and perceptions of attractiveness and thinness in Dove's Campaign for Real Beauty. International Journal of Advertising, 643-668.

Engeln-Maddox. (2006). Buying a beauty standard or dreaming of a new life? Expectations associated with media ideals. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 258-66.

Gitter, M. (2010, 9 8). Unrealistic beauty standards affect men and women. Retrieved 12 1, 2011, from Fourth Estate: http://www.fourthestatenewspaper.com/life/unrealistic-beauty-standards-affect-men-and-women-1.1572873?pagereq=2

Mallick, H. (2006). It Ain't Me, Babe. Chatelaine, 83-86.

Morford, M. (2008). Of course it's not real. But fo you really care? San Francisco Chronicle, 11.

PR Newswire. (2011). CA-Off-Our-Chests-Act. PR Newswire US.

Quelch, J., & Jocz, K. (2008). Holding a mirror up to marketing. Marketing Management, 16-21.

Rosen, C. (2010). That anti-beauty myth. Commentary, 36-38.