Part 1
In Robert Scholes article, “On Reading a Video Text,” Scholes says, “In processing a narrative text we actually construct the story, bringing a vast repertory of cultural knowledge to bear upon the text we are contemplating.” Scholes asks do we get the story of the product being sold. Are we capable of understanding the cultural information? There are so many commercials out there like the Budweiser commercial in the article. All have the same motive of trying to get you to buy their product over their competition. If they can convince you to believe in their sales tactics; they have successfully hooked you in, like fishing with the correct bait.
http://www.youtubecom/watch?v=4bVr7cbMb7ois
Part 2
Pepsi Refresh Anthem Super bowl ad XLIII
The Pepsi refresh Anthem shows different generations of younger people with a lot of cultural information. In about one minute is trying to tell and sell you the idea that this old product is always new, exciting, and not boring. In this commercial they go back and forth with the old generation of the 1970's and 1980’s, to the 21 st century. Pepsi has Bob Dylan and Will.I.am singing “forever young” throughout the entire song, because it is trying to bridge the generational gap to sell to a larger market of people. The commercial shows people returning from the military in two different wars. Pepsi shows a comparison of gender with Bruce Lee, and a women fighter today showing her karate moves. There are two different Surfers, surfing small waves. The Anthem shows two people spraying peace signs on different wall styles. Pepsi also shows two different cartoons which are Shrek and Gumby. The commercial correlates using a lighter back in the day because everyone that had one and smoked to people today that don’t smoke as much, so using cell phone light, instead of lighters at a concerts that says you like the music and that you are having a good time The commercial shows two movies which are the Blues Brothers and School of Rock that comparing blues and rock and roll of the times. Finally there were two different politically demonstrations going on. What does all this have to do with Pepsi? Not a thing. It is just a bunch of well know icons, of the past and present generations’ to get you to relate and purchase their Pepsi drink product.
Monday, February 28, 2011
R R 6
In the article “Jesus is a Brand of Jeans,” written by Jean Kilbourne, he talks about how products are replacing the connection with human relationships. The products are that person you want it to be. Kilbourne says, “the proposition to promise us a relationship with the product itself: buy this and it will love you,” is an example of how advertisement is working in today’s consumer world.
I am of two minds on this article. Kilbourne is talking about how products are idolized and put on a pedestal. If you are of Christian or Catholic belief, the title would probably be offensive. The church I go to, the pastor has talked about this subject matter. He gave an example of how this truck ad made him idolized this truck. It was so shiny; it could go thru anything in its path. The pastor wanted it. So he went in to how you are not to worship and idolize anything but God. You are somewhat worshiping the product, or coveting your neighbor for having that product. You have to keep up with the Jones’ is the famous expression that some people use in today’s society. My dad and the next door neighbor were perfect example of this as I was growing up. My grandma died and my dad got a good inheritance. So he bought a brand new Bay liner boat. So my next door neighbor bought a new boat too. My dad then bought a new car. So guess what the neighbor did, he bought a new car and commented that he had to keep up with us. I never understood this concept. It might be a guy’s thing. I am glad I never got in to frame of mind. Products don’t affect me as much as it does some people. I never have the money to worry about the newest things or the brands of clothing. Not with the price of gas it is, or how every time I turn around the price of food or the price of utilities are going up. If the minimum wage goes up, everything goes up too and my wage stays the same. Pretty soon minimum wage will be at my wage, and I would have to go into another line of work. But today, I can see why the majority of people buy brand named items with the advertising they do today. For example, the way they make the M&M’s real people. You might want to ask yourself the question, how would you try to sell a product today without using this style of advertising Kilbourne suggests?
I am of two minds on this article. Kilbourne is talking about how products are idolized and put on a pedestal. If you are of Christian or Catholic belief, the title would probably be offensive. The church I go to, the pastor has talked about this subject matter. He gave an example of how this truck ad made him idolized this truck. It was so shiny; it could go thru anything in its path. The pastor wanted it. So he went in to how you are not to worship and idolize anything but God. You are somewhat worshiping the product, or coveting your neighbor for having that product. You have to keep up with the Jones’ is the famous expression that some people use in today’s society. My dad and the next door neighbor were perfect example of this as I was growing up. My grandma died and my dad got a good inheritance. So he bought a brand new Bay liner boat. So my next door neighbor bought a new boat too. My dad then bought a new car. So guess what the neighbor did, he bought a new car and commented that he had to keep up with us. I never understood this concept. It might be a guy’s thing. I am glad I never got in to frame of mind. Products don’t affect me as much as it does some people. I never have the money to worry about the newest things or the brands of clothing. Not with the price of gas it is, or how every time I turn around the price of food or the price of utilities are going up. If the minimum wage goes up, everything goes up too and my wage stays the same. Pretty soon minimum wage will be at my wage, and I would have to go into another line of work. But today, I can see why the majority of people buy brand named items with the advertising they do today. For example, the way they make the M&M’s real people. You might want to ask yourself the question, how would you try to sell a product today without using this style of advertising Kilbourne suggests?
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
RR#6
Mike Prado
English 100
Reading Response #6
2/23/2011
As I watch television, sometimes on a daily basis, I always get annoyed by the frequency of commercials. I mean every time I watch a show almost a third of it is just commercials. Then I notice how companies advertise their products everywhere. Whether it be on television, the internet, magazines, billboards, and many other media sources. Has it ever sunken in that in our current society that there is no possible way to avoid commercials? I mean unless you would want an Amish lifestyle, it is inevitable that you will watch a commercial or two in your lifetime. But as our society constantly watches forms of advertising, one has to think, what are these advertisements really do to us and the products they advertise?
In the article “Jesus is a Brand of Jeans” written by Jean Kilbourne, Kilbourne believes in the idea that society is starting to develop false “relationships” with products instead of human beings. Kilbourne explains that people are targeting by advertisements by having the advertisements attack human emotions and feelings. Kilbourne states that “We are surrounded by hundreds, thousands of messages every day that link our deepest emotions to products, that objectify people and trivialize our most heartfelt moments and relationships. Every emotion is used to sell us something.” Kilbourne basically states that if society is surrounded by advertisements that are aimed at human emotions and feelings than those products will be associated with those feelings. These forms of advertisements can really push ideas into the minds of consumers (or people) of what advertisers want consumers to think. Such as people can associate alcohol with having a good time as most alcohol commercials tend to do. When I grew up I always associated alcohol with the same idea which lead to my underage drinking as well. Or women could associate with only being beautiful by using a certain cosmetic product. Many women face self esteem issues due to these advertisements stating how women should look to be beautiful. Although some could find these advertisements to not harmful as an adult, but what do these advertisements do to children? Children are some of the most heavily influenced people in our society. Another problem Kilbourne addresses is how we associate certain words with product notification. Cleverly stating “Eternity is a perfume by Calvin Klein. Infiniti is an automobile, and Hydra Zen a moisturizer. Jesus is a brand of jeans.” This can show how humans are creating a relationship with these products as we associate them with words. This can be bad as This idea can be seen everywhere, for example, take McDonalds little harmonic and phrase “Dadada I’m Loving It” is know worldwide as there are McDonalds in most countries. If we associate these forms of advertisements in our lives than we only build stronger relationships with products not people.
I believe that a worldwide realization of the power of advertisements need to be taught in order to educated people into the harmful effects of advertising. If people are not educated on the influential ways of advertisements then people are sitting ducks to the manipulation that advertisers tend to force onto us. If people are aware on how to read advertisements and are aware of the false relationships they try to build with society then people will be less likely to fall victim to association through products. If an education through awareness is imposed on advertisements and the products they sell, maybe there could be reduced numbers in issues such as under the age alcohol consumption or women depression.
English 100
Reading Response #6
2/23/2011
As I watch television, sometimes on a daily basis, I always get annoyed by the frequency of commercials. I mean every time I watch a show almost a third of it is just commercials. Then I notice how companies advertise their products everywhere. Whether it be on television, the internet, magazines, billboards, and many other media sources. Has it ever sunken in that in our current society that there is no possible way to avoid commercials? I mean unless you would want an Amish lifestyle, it is inevitable that you will watch a commercial or two in your lifetime. But as our society constantly watches forms of advertising, one has to think, what are these advertisements really do to us and the products they advertise?
In the article “Jesus is a Brand of Jeans” written by Jean Kilbourne, Kilbourne believes in the idea that society is starting to develop false “relationships” with products instead of human beings. Kilbourne explains that people are targeting by advertisements by having the advertisements attack human emotions and feelings. Kilbourne states that “We are surrounded by hundreds, thousands of messages every day that link our deepest emotions to products, that objectify people and trivialize our most heartfelt moments and relationships. Every emotion is used to sell us something.” Kilbourne basically states that if society is surrounded by advertisements that are aimed at human emotions and feelings than those products will be associated with those feelings. These forms of advertisements can really push ideas into the minds of consumers (or people) of what advertisers want consumers to think. Such as people can associate alcohol with having a good time as most alcohol commercials tend to do. When I grew up I always associated alcohol with the same idea which lead to my underage drinking as well. Or women could associate with only being beautiful by using a certain cosmetic product. Many women face self esteem issues due to these advertisements stating how women should look to be beautiful. Although some could find these advertisements to not harmful as an adult, but what do these advertisements do to children? Children are some of the most heavily influenced people in our society. Another problem Kilbourne addresses is how we associate certain words with product notification. Cleverly stating “Eternity is a perfume by Calvin Klein. Infiniti is an automobile, and Hydra Zen a moisturizer. Jesus is a brand of jeans.” This can show how humans are creating a relationship with these products as we associate them with words. This can be bad as This idea can be seen everywhere, for example, take McDonalds little harmonic and phrase “Dadada I’m Loving It” is know worldwide as there are McDonalds in most countries. If we associate these forms of advertisements in our lives than we only build stronger relationships with products not people.
I believe that a worldwide realization of the power of advertisements need to be taught in order to educated people into the harmful effects of advertising. If people are not educated on the influential ways of advertisements then people are sitting ducks to the manipulation that advertisers tend to force onto us. If people are aware on how to read advertisements and are aware of the false relationships they try to build with society then people will be less likely to fall victim to association through products. If an education through awareness is imposed on advertisements and the products they sell, maybe there could be reduced numbers in issues such as under the age alcohol consumption or women depression.
Anna this is the site I went to.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/forum/2010/01/roundtable-2-the-crowd.html#_comform
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/forum/2010/01/roundtable-2-the-crowd.html#_comform
asdfsdf asdfsdf asdg sfdh nvftrds.
Is Google Making us Stupid is a great article, but I skimmed it. Not because I don't have the attention span to read a long article. I just hate reading long articles on a computer screen. The glare, even if I dim the resolution, hurts my eyes after a while. Perhaps this is because I have awful eyes. I print long articles and then read them the old fashioned way instead because it is much easier for me to read from paper than a screen. For good readers, the computer doesn't really change the way we read. I think we know how to change the way we read based on the medium. Less advanced readers don't have that ability and it doesn't matter what they are reading, they just don't get it because they don't have the skills. Reading is reading no matter how you’re doing it. There may be more distractions on the internet but a good reader can move beyond those.
Standing Ovation: Jesus is a brand of jeans ( best title )
Standing Ovation: Jesus is a brand of jeans ( best title ): "In the article “Jesus is a brand of jeans” Jean Kilbourne spreads some light by bringing to evidence the hidden gloomy aspects of media adve..."
Though i agree the human conscious is ruthelessly distorted i dont blame capitalism, advertising, or corporations though they may cause behavior it is rooted in the individuals of our society, the careless and recklessness of our people, without will to change or care, creating an indifferent behavior in all the man's institutions. We do not care. We being the people as a whole, not individually, have no idea what it means to care. We reward and support the behavior of greed and dehumanization by paying self intrested groups, and giving the power they need to do what they please and walk all over the essence of humanity. A friend once told me people are forgivable, attitudes are not. Same goes for this system the condition that most have is changable but the behavior that the system produces is not.
Though i agree the human conscious is ruthelessly distorted i dont blame capitalism, advertising, or corporations though they may cause behavior it is rooted in the individuals of our society, the careless and recklessness of our people, without will to change or care, creating an indifferent behavior in all the man's institutions. We do not care. We being the people as a whole, not individually, have no idea what it means to care. We reward and support the behavior of greed and dehumanization by paying self intrested groups, and giving the power they need to do what they please and walk all over the essence of humanity. A friend once told me people are forgivable, attitudes are not. Same goes for this system the condition that most have is changable but the behavior that the system produces is not.
Jesus is a brand of jeans ( best title )
In the article “Jesus is a brand of jeans” Jean Kilbourne spreads some light by bringing to evidence the hidden gloomy aspects of media advertisements. He emphasizes on the uncountable mediate scenario’s that the masses daily ingurgitate and explains how poisonous and devastating it is to the human spirit. When products become more important than people and love is materialized in products, the human consciousness vanishes allowing a process of dehumanization to take place. It is literally the love of power overthrowing the power of love. How poisonous is that? If we take the time and climb the pyramid to see the source of this unfortunate occurring, we will find that the capitalistic system is the ultimate culprit because it is based on greed and it creates benefit through conflict. I think one cannot critically discuss advertisements without bringing up the main generator of ads. I truly enjoyed reading the article because Jean Kilbourne took the goal of ads to its most extreme ideology which is valuing relationships with products over relationships with humans. As he states “After all, it is easier to love a product than a person. Relationships with human beings are messy, unpredictable, and sometimes dangerous. ‘When was the last time you felt this comfortable in a relationship?’ asks an ad for shoes.” Through this statement we can see that ads sell us the illusion of comfort with a product rather than comfort itself from the perspective of a human being. It tells us that we’d feel more confident and comfortable wearing those shoes than being with a human. What kind of comfort or confidence is that? Here we assist to an obvious illusionary scenario played by the ads corporation. Today this topic is of extreme importance because these capitalistic monsters are surrounding our environment and are infiltrating subconscious messages that connect our most profound feelings to materiel products. We must remain vigilant to these human violations, especially in a capitalistic era where the gap between what it means to be human and the way we live our lives is getting bigger and bigger.
Reading Response 6
Advertising is something people look at and see the big picture, what is being sold in the ad, but what many people don’t realize is they are being sold a relationship; which to company makes you thing the product will give you. In her article, Jesus is a Brand of Jeans; Jean Kilbourne advocates that advertising is changing. The ads are changing in a way that makes you more attached to the product; “Ads have long promised us a better relationship via a product: buy this and you will be loved. But more recently they have gone beyond that proposition to promise us a relationship with the product itself: buy this and it will love you.”
This new way of thinking about advertising is truly what advertisers are doing and have been for a while. People are addicted to products, brands and just even items. Kilbourne states that it is easier to love a product than love a person and we in our society clearly believe this and do it daily. Also, she goes on to show that relationships with products are one way and you don’t have to deal with the other side, the product, breaking your heart or being unpredictable. I do agree that products are much easier to love, but then you do not form that bond that you can with humans; we are making objects into humans by forming relationships with them.
Along with forming relationships with products we also, in general, are brand specific. By this meaning, buy one brand of something and stick to that brand. It’s just like being loyal in a relationship with a person; we are loyal to a brand the same way. People are this way because products are easy to have relationships with and people are not, but if you wanted easy this is a good way out, but who wants to take the easy way out, I know I don’t. I think people resort to this because they don’t want to have to deal with humans who will fight back, state their opinion and maybe even tell them no.
In Kilbourne’s article she states that what she hears at her lectures is “I don’t pay attention to ads… I just tune them out… they have no effect on me.” I would like to think that I do that too, but then I realized through this article, that I am very tuned into what is said and done in advertisements, and they have a bigger impact on my life than I would like to notice. Before reading Kilbourne’s article I had somewhat of an idea of how advertisements were but now, what I thought before is nothing like what I know now. The way I thought before was that advertisements were just trying in any way to appeal to consumers to buy the products, now I realize that ads are trying to get you to form that connection with a product and then once the connection is formed then get you to buy the product.
Reading Response 6
In Jean Kilbourne’s article “Jesus is a Brand of Jeans,” she observes the impact advertisements have had on today’s society. With advertisements everywhere we go, there is no possible way to avoid them. One can try, but eventually, we all run into them. She goes onto explain how advertisements are helping us replace real human relationships with the products being sold. She insists, “The problem with advertising isn’t that it creates artificial needs, but it exploits our very real and human desires. Advertising promotes a bankrupt concept of relationship.” She means that advertisements have a way of making us think these objects can give us real human desires. Such as true friendships, love, all things realistically money cannot buy. She also states, “We learn from childhood that it is far safer to make a commitment to a product than a person, far easier to be loyal to a brand.” Since products can’t betray us or there is really no work involved in that “relationship” it has taken over what our culture is all about now. They are displaying a quicker easier way to fill those desires, instead of working through our problems. Objects are becoming a quick fix for us emotionally and that is the mission of advertisements. They are so carefully crafted, every second of each commercial or every little piece of a billboard was thought so deeply to manipulate us into these thoughts. People are in such denial of advertisements, they continue to brush it off. They are allowing these products to get in the way of the things money can’t buy and in a sense filling a void.
In Kilbourne’s article she states that at every one of her lectures she always hears people say, “I don’t pay attention to ads… I just tune them out… they have no effect on me.” And as I was reading this article and thinking about advertisements I found myself saying the same thing. Then, I took a look into my closet and found brand name jeans and brand name shoes. I have been in denial of how advertisements have truly affected me. I have fallen for the tricks advertisements have attempted to play on everyone. I pretend like I’m different and there is no way I’d fall for that, but in reality I am just the same. In the summer, before I sold my car, I would always see commercials for faster, newer cars. The advertisements would make me feel like my car wasn’t good enough, it gave me a sense that I would be happier if I had a new car. Even though, I had a car that ran perfectly fine and had never crapped out on me, I still wanted to try and give it up just for something shinier and newer. I knew it wouldn’t get me more friends or make me look cooler. I don’t even care about all that, but because of an advertisement I did for a little bit. I hopped on the computer looking for better cars that I could afford, desperately searching. I ended up not buying a new car and selling my old one and I’ve been very content without one. I’m glad I didn’t end up buying a new car, but I still find myself falling for their little tricks. With shoes, clothes, anything and it can be very annoying. It’s just crazy how that 30 seconds can really make such an impact.
In Kilbourne’s article she states that at every one of her lectures she always hears people say, “I don’t pay attention to ads… I just tune them out… they have no effect on me.” And as I was reading this article and thinking about advertisements I found myself saying the same thing. Then, I took a look into my closet and found brand name jeans and brand name shoes. I have been in denial of how advertisements have truly affected me. I have fallen for the tricks advertisements have attempted to play on everyone. I pretend like I’m different and there is no way I’d fall for that, but in reality I am just the same. In the summer, before I sold my car, I would always see commercials for faster, newer cars. The advertisements would make me feel like my car wasn’t good enough, it gave me a sense that I would be happier if I had a new car. Even though, I had a car that ran perfectly fine and had never crapped out on me, I still wanted to try and give it up just for something shinier and newer. I knew it wouldn’t get me more friends or make me look cooler. I don’t even care about all that, but because of an advertisement I did for a little bit. I hopped on the computer looking for better cars that I could afford, desperately searching. I ended up not buying a new car and selling my old one and I’ve been very content without one. I’m glad I didn’t end up buying a new car, but I still find myself falling for their little tricks. With shoes, clothes, anything and it can be very annoying. It’s just crazy how that 30 seconds can really make such an impact.
Jesus is a brand of jeans
Recently I read an article written by Jean Kilbourne entitled “Jesus is a brand of jeans”.
In the article Kilbourne is stressing the Idea that advertising is stripping us of our spirituality, culture is becoming commercialism. Kilbourne believes that because of the way advertisements are deployed they’re changing our values in what I (and I’m pretty sure she) would consider an extremely negative way. Kilbourne talks of their efforts to addict us to consumerism as children and leave us emotionally starved, expecting products to fill the void that they create in us. The culture that comes with these advertisements is turning us into self-indulgent, close minded people Kilbourne sums this idea up quite well bemoaning that “This apparently bottomless consumerism not only depletes the world’s resources, it also depletes our inner resources. It leads inevitably to narcissism and solipsism”. Kilborune also makes a point about how quickly advertisements can really affect a culture that is not consumerist in nature. Kilbourne notes the Gwish’in tribe, a tribe in Alaska, who were first exposed to television in 1980. Within ten years consumerism had taken over the original culture of the tribe, “Beaded moccasins gave way to Nike sneakers, and ‘tundra tea’ to Folger’s instant coffee”.
I find the Ideas Kilbourne present to be quite disturbing. I can’t even begin to think if a way to stop the advertising giants, but it’s frightening to think, with consumerism spreading like wildfire (maybe a little bit slower) what is going to come of both our cultural values and our natural resources. It’s only a matter of time before outside sources introduce these ideals to more currently independent and actually cultured groups, I’m sure it’s going on as I write this. The one thing I can think of that might slow down the cycle would be education. I for one had the wool over my eyes a bit before reading this article, sure I knew that advertisements were designed to get into my pocket and make me want what they’re trying to sell, but I didn’t give much thought to the consequences of my lifestyle. If people were a little more educated on what these ads were doing to them subconsciously perhaps they’d be better equipped to make a conscious decision against them. I can’t help but think, however, this is a pipe dream. The people who want us to consume have an extraordinary amount of resources to keep us in line. If we really wanted to turn things around we’d have to dispose of the radio, television, the internet… It’s a bit unrealistic to expect that. What you can do however is be aware of what the advertisers are trying to do to you, try to live for yourself and not your possessions, raise your children to be cultured not consumers. Teach them about their family, their history. Enlighten those around you, be your own person. If we live by these principles we might just retake culture, and I mean culture in the real sense, not what it is now.
In the article Kilbourne is stressing the Idea that advertising is stripping us of our spirituality, culture is becoming commercialism. Kilbourne believes that because of the way advertisements are deployed they’re changing our values in what I (and I’m pretty sure she) would consider an extremely negative way. Kilbourne talks of their efforts to addict us to consumerism as children and leave us emotionally starved, expecting products to fill the void that they create in us. The culture that comes with these advertisements is turning us into self-indulgent, close minded people Kilbourne sums this idea up quite well bemoaning that “This apparently bottomless consumerism not only depletes the world’s resources, it also depletes our inner resources. It leads inevitably to narcissism and solipsism”. Kilborune also makes a point about how quickly advertisements can really affect a culture that is not consumerist in nature. Kilbourne notes the Gwish’in tribe, a tribe in Alaska, who were first exposed to television in 1980. Within ten years consumerism had taken over the original culture of the tribe, “Beaded moccasins gave way to Nike sneakers, and ‘tundra tea’ to Folger’s instant coffee”.
I find the Ideas Kilbourne present to be quite disturbing. I can’t even begin to think if a way to stop the advertising giants, but it’s frightening to think, with consumerism spreading like wildfire (maybe a little bit slower) what is going to come of both our cultural values and our natural resources. It’s only a matter of time before outside sources introduce these ideals to more currently independent and actually cultured groups, I’m sure it’s going on as I write this. The one thing I can think of that might slow down the cycle would be education. I for one had the wool over my eyes a bit before reading this article, sure I knew that advertisements were designed to get into my pocket and make me want what they’re trying to sell, but I didn’t give much thought to the consequences of my lifestyle. If people were a little more educated on what these ads were doing to them subconsciously perhaps they’d be better equipped to make a conscious decision against them. I can’t help but think, however, this is a pipe dream. The people who want us to consume have an extraordinary amount of resources to keep us in line. If we really wanted to turn things around we’d have to dispose of the radio, television, the internet… It’s a bit unrealistic to expect that. What you can do however is be aware of what the advertisers are trying to do to you, try to live for yourself and not your possessions, raise your children to be cultured not consumers. Teach them about their family, their history. Enlighten those around you, be your own person. If we live by these principles we might just retake culture, and I mean culture in the real sense, not what it is now.
Jesus is a brand of Jesus
“Jesus is a brand of Jeans,” written by Jean Kilbourne who talks about the world of Advertising. “Ads have long promised us a better relationship via a product: buy this and you will be loved. But more recently they have gone beyond that proposition to promise us a relationship with the product itself: buy this and it will love you. The product is not so much the means to an end, as the end itself.” This quote had really grabbed my attention because it states the true meaning of Advertising. Ads used to be there for us for a support after we buy the product but now it’s all about the “product.” People in today’s society seem to pay attention more to advertising than anything else. This article also talks about the way people have better relationships with products rather than an actual person. A product won’t call people names, won’t tell them everything they are doing wrong. A product is simply a product. “In the world of advertising, lovers grow cold, spouses grow old, children grow up and away – but possessions stay with us and never change.” Everything eventually disappears from us in the real world, but the stuff we own are there with us as long as we want them to be and they don’t ever change.
I agree with the quote, “Ads have long promised us a better relationship via a product: buy this and you will be loved. But more recently they have gone beyond that proposition to promise us a relationship with the product itself: buy this and it will love you. The product is not so much the means to an end, as the end itself,” because I have experienced this in my life as well as every person in the world today has. Advertising is one of those things that are constantly with us and around us no matter where we are. We might not notice that it has an affect on us until we are at the store or somewhere else with products. For instance, a couple weeks ago I went shopping for a pair of white jeans. I went to Wal-Mart, K-Mart, TJ Max, etc., and couldn’t find any pair that I liked or were “in style.” Then once I went to the mall I had ended up buying $50 pair of jeans. Why?? I could have gotten a pair of pants that look about the same for a lot cheaper. Is it because I really liked them or is it because of the brand? I think that advertising plays a big role in our lives when we don’t even realize it.
I agree with the quote, “Ads have long promised us a better relationship via a product: buy this and you will be loved. But more recently they have gone beyond that proposition to promise us a relationship with the product itself: buy this and it will love you. The product is not so much the means to an end, as the end itself,” because I have experienced this in my life as well as every person in the world today has. Advertising is one of those things that are constantly with us and around us no matter where we are. We might not notice that it has an affect on us until we are at the store or somewhere else with products. For instance, a couple weeks ago I went shopping for a pair of white jeans. I went to Wal-Mart, K-Mart, TJ Max, etc., and couldn’t find any pair that I liked or were “in style.” Then once I went to the mall I had ended up buying $50 pair of jeans. Why?? I could have gotten a pair of pants that look about the same for a lot cheaper. Is it because I really liked them or is it because of the brand? I think that advertising plays a big role in our lives when we don’t even realize it.
Is Consumerism Leaving us Unsatisfied?
Generally, people do not love unconditionally. The way humans take in information is by analyzing and placing it into categories. Each intact human constantly make judgments about you and everything around them. Objects do not judge us. Most of us know what it’s like to be backstabbed or betrayed, and it’s one of the worst feelings I have personally experienced. Products do not possess the ability to betray us, they’ll be there as long as you keep them there. Ad producers have realized this and are now marketing products as stability in your unstable life.
In the article Jesus is a Brand of Jeans, Jean Kilbourne informs us, “Ads have long promised us a better relationship via a product: buy this and you will be loved. But more recently they have gone beyond that proposition to promise us a relationship with the product itself: buy this and it will love you. After all, it is easier to love a product than a person. Relationships with human beings are messy, unpredictable, and sometimes dangerous. ‘When was the last time you felt this comfortable in a relationship?’ asks an ad for shoes. Our shoes never ask us to wash the dishes or tell us we’re getting fat. Even more important, products don’t betray us.”
I agree that products are being marketed in the place of humans because my childhood experiences with advertisements were that if I had a Barbie doll, it would not only replace my friends but it would be my friend. I believe children are the most vulnerable to ads because they are so trusting and naive. Kilbourne argues that consumerism is basically stating that the only way we can be happy is through purchasing products. However, in my psych class at WCC, I learned that based on all sorts of different components of happiness, the people that are the happiest are the ones that have the least. I believe this is due to the fact that they are satisfied with what little they have, and they are not exposed to the million and one things there are to want. When we want things that we do not end up getting that causes negative feelings. Without these completely unnecessary wanting we further appreciate what we have.
When I was in fifth grade I went to Guatemala for the first time. I grew up a privileged child, so this was a real eye opener for me. The purpose of the trip was to work with a Guatemalan family and other people involved in the same organization as us to build a home. To build a concrete house (which was relatively small considering how many people each family has) costs around $2,000 and the family is required to take out a micro-loan. The family is not required to help but they did just as much work as we did, maybe more. These were the hardest working people I had come across. They were ecstatic to finally have a house and no longer live in a metal shack they had built. We had marshmallows in the car with us and we brought them to the family. They were so thankful! They savored every bite and did not ask for more, they were content.
We also visited a family that did not qualify for a micro-loan. There were six children in the family, all very close in age because they don’t believe in or have access to birth control there. They were living in a shack and burning plastic Frisbees instead of wood because that is what they have access to. They each had a few items of clothing, and worked in a field nearby making a few dollars a week. We talked to them through someone with us who spoke Spanish and translated for us. For people living in a shack the size of my living room in complete poverty they were happier and more thankful than the average person I know. Therefore, I agree with Kilbourne that consumerism leaves us feeling unsatisfied.
In the article Jesus is a Brand of Jeans, Jean Kilbourne informs us, “Ads have long promised us a better relationship via a product: buy this and you will be loved. But more recently they have gone beyond that proposition to promise us a relationship with the product itself: buy this and it will love you. After all, it is easier to love a product than a person. Relationships with human beings are messy, unpredictable, and sometimes dangerous. ‘When was the last time you felt this comfortable in a relationship?’ asks an ad for shoes. Our shoes never ask us to wash the dishes or tell us we’re getting fat. Even more important, products don’t betray us.”
I agree that products are being marketed in the place of humans because my childhood experiences with advertisements were that if I had a Barbie doll, it would not only replace my friends but it would be my friend. I believe children are the most vulnerable to ads because they are so trusting and naive. Kilbourne argues that consumerism is basically stating that the only way we can be happy is through purchasing products. However, in my psych class at WCC, I learned that based on all sorts of different components of happiness, the people that are the happiest are the ones that have the least. I believe this is due to the fact that they are satisfied with what little they have, and they are not exposed to the million and one things there are to want. When we want things that we do not end up getting that causes negative feelings. Without these completely unnecessary wanting we further appreciate what we have.
When I was in fifth grade I went to Guatemala for the first time. I grew up a privileged child, so this was a real eye opener for me. The purpose of the trip was to work with a Guatemalan family and other people involved in the same organization as us to build a home. To build a concrete house (which was relatively small considering how many people each family has) costs around $2,000 and the family is required to take out a micro-loan. The family is not required to help but they did just as much work as we did, maybe more. These were the hardest working people I had come across. They were ecstatic to finally have a house and no longer live in a metal shack they had built. We had marshmallows in the car with us and we brought them to the family. They were so thankful! They savored every bite and did not ask for more, they were content.
We also visited a family that did not qualify for a micro-loan. There were six children in the family, all very close in age because they don’t believe in or have access to birth control there. They were living in a shack and burning plastic Frisbees instead of wood because that is what they have access to. They each had a few items of clothing, and worked in a field nearby making a few dollars a week. We talked to them through someone with us who spoke Spanish and translated for us. For people living in a shack the size of my living room in complete poverty they were happier and more thankful than the average person I know. Therefore, I agree with Kilbourne that consumerism leaves us feeling unsatisfied.
#6
In the Article Jesus is a Brand of Jeans, by Jean Kilbourne, it is brought up how society has been affected by advertisements. We might not always be able to see that it is or how it’s affecting us, but there is really no way around it. We see ads on everything now a day and most have to do with our appearance. It’s all about how you will look with a certain product and how you will feel after you have it. The article mentions how most human beings look for relationships and when we do we look for one that will last, we tend to do this with products we buy and forget about people relationships; “it is easier to love a product than a person. Relationships with human beings are messy, unpredictable, and sometimes dangerous.“ Says Kilbourne. It makes perfect sense why we would do this; we have made it a major necessity in life to focus on how we look, so we are going to buy whatever is most convincing to help achieve this. We tend to be sensitive creatures so relationships scare us, but we do want that feeling of having someone there for you, therefore we get hooked in our products, because they will never disappoint us. In regards to advertisements Kilbourne states: “cumulatively they create a climate of cynicism that is poisonous to relationships. Ad after ad portrays our real lives as dull and ordinary, commitment to human beings as something to be avoided.” Not only to ads persuade us to buy merchandise, but they put thoughts in our head of how we should or could be living. The article really shows how we have become so much more invested in the latest products then what it means to be a human. From experience I know how it feels to be affected by advertisements. When I was younger I always read Seventeen magazine, and looked at all the make-up and clothes ideas, finding ways to improve myself and change. I would get so hooked on little changes that I wanted to make; sometimes it was something as small as a new style of shirt. I really thought I would be better off with certain product and I would believe whatever the ads told me. There was a specific time I remember when my sister and I were watching TV and a commercial came on for “Veet shaving products” It’s similar to Nair because you leave it on and it takes off your hair without a razor. The second we saw it we instantly became intrigued and left for the store to purchase it. Of course when we tried it, it wasn’t nearly as impressive as the commercial made it seem, but it fooled us and who knows how many others. I always told myself that I didn’t actually believe that buying certain items would “improve” me or make me feel better, but I can honestly say I must have really thought that. When looking at ads, I got ideas of what I thought I wanted to look like, be known for, what my relationship would look like. Even though I said that the media and advertisements didn’t affect me, they most certainly shaped my thoughts. One picture could cause me to obsess over having a product that in the end wouldn’t work and would be a waste of money. I still find myself acting this way, but when I notice it I just try to remind myself that it’s about who I am as a person and that always outshines what you have on.
reading response 6
In Jean Kilbourne’s article “Jesus is a Brand of Jeans,” the author attempts to grasp how the culture of advertising is influencing the nature of how we relate to each other. Kilbourne explains that advertising doesn’t merely function on the level of promoting a product. That is the endpoint, ultimately, but we would be deceiving ourselves if we thought we were immune to the side-effects. These unnoticed effects are namely the reversing of our value system, as Kilbourne explains: “Advertising encourages us not only to objectify each other but to feel passion for products rather than our partners.” This substituting of human/spiritual values for the values of material consumerism causes people to become cynical about their relationships with people, but romantic about their relationships with products. Kilbourne warns that this economic model of pathological commercialism leads to a toxic society, where “the major motivating force for social change throughout the world today is this belief that happiness comes from the market.”
I agree with Kilbourne that too much of this sort of commercialism can have negative consequences because I have known several people who have become swept up in the craze for fancy new things and went bankrupt as a result. This fixation with consuming led them to irresponsible spending, where they bought too many things they couldn‘t afford, and they eventually lost everything. However, I don’t think it would be best if we attempted to remove this control of advertising from our life. The majority of people I know are so engrained in this path, and so reliant on this value system, that they have nothing to fall back on, and would probably fare very badly in this system if we disrupted it. I have met several people who through their own admission would not be able to function without this influence in their life. Without the idea that there is a reward in their life for working so hard, rewards that contribute directly and immediately to pleasure, not the reward of immaterial values that have less direct and immediate hedonistic value. So, I don’t think we should necessarily detach the cultural context that feeds the dissatisfaction and craving in the populace, because without it we would be threatening to remove the impetus of people to function in our society. For instance, if we all lived in a void for long enough, we would slowly lose the defense mechanism of battling unhappiness with consuming, and thus the need for working to keep consuming would become less important. But since we’re all trapped in a bubble that makes people buy, in a job most of us don‘t think contributes to our happiness directly, and surrounded by people who don’t seem to know any better than keep consuming, the best scenario in our system seems to be getting the most out of a crummy situation by exploiting the advantages of a system that exploits us. This is not ideal, propagating discontent in the public is certainly not ethical, but our Capitalist system cannot simply be slowed down, so wide-scale unhappiness is a far more feasible economic policy for Capitalism than making everybody seek happiness through pursuing immaterial values. Without ever-increasing the consumption of the people, our system will inevitably lead to overproduction and possible collapse. So, advertising shouldn’t not exist nor exist too much.
I agree with Kilbourne that too much of this sort of commercialism can have negative consequences because I have known several people who have become swept up in the craze for fancy new things and went bankrupt as a result. This fixation with consuming led them to irresponsible spending, where they bought too many things they couldn‘t afford, and they eventually lost everything. However, I don’t think it would be best if we attempted to remove this control of advertising from our life. The majority of people I know are so engrained in this path, and so reliant on this value system, that they have nothing to fall back on, and would probably fare very badly in this system if we disrupted it. I have met several people who through their own admission would not be able to function without this influence in their life. Without the idea that there is a reward in their life for working so hard, rewards that contribute directly and immediately to pleasure, not the reward of immaterial values that have less direct and immediate hedonistic value. So, I don’t think we should necessarily detach the cultural context that feeds the dissatisfaction and craving in the populace, because without it we would be threatening to remove the impetus of people to function in our society. For instance, if we all lived in a void for long enough, we would slowly lose the defense mechanism of battling unhappiness with consuming, and thus the need for working to keep consuming would become less important. But since we’re all trapped in a bubble that makes people buy, in a job most of us don‘t think contributes to our happiness directly, and surrounded by people who don’t seem to know any better than keep consuming, the best scenario in our system seems to be getting the most out of a crummy situation by exploiting the advantages of a system that exploits us. This is not ideal, propagating discontent in the public is certainly not ethical, but our Capitalist system cannot simply be slowed down, so wide-scale unhappiness is a far more feasible economic policy for Capitalism than making everybody seek happiness through pursuing immaterial values. Without ever-increasing the consumption of the people, our system will inevitably lead to overproduction and possible collapse. So, advertising shouldn’t not exist nor exist too much.
Reading Response #6
Advertisement are made to do there job, by selling you a type of product and persuading you to but it. In many ways ads are presented, when humans taking it as amusing, funny and serious. In the article “Jesus is a brand of Jeans,” Jean Kilbourne addresses “The problem with advertising isn’t that it creates artificial needs, but that it exploits our very real and human desires.” In other words Ads are using what humans desire to sell of there product and manipulate humans by thinking on what they are passionately wanting or what they need. Even though we know how many products can’t give you the desire, the consumers are attracted to the way it’s put into words and how it’s shown to make it so real. Like Kilbourne says “It’s easier to love a product than its person.” He explains how many products are presented as not judging you, making you comfortable and how it will never betray you. In other words it’s the opposite with a relationship it’s easier to be with a product than a person; a better relationship is built up. Advertising is not only using human’s emotions but it also uses humans self image to sell of a product. As Kilbourne puts it “Advertising often turns people into objects.” Human’s desires again are used to grab the attention of consumers. A better way to have consumers always is by putting it out to children. “If you hook them early they are yours for life.” When products are thrown out to an early age you have more people addicted to your product. “The addict is the ideal consumer,” this knowledge is used for products to be sold mainly to their wanting people that are already consuming it. Products are thrown out to the people that are more hooked.
I agree with Kilbourne that products in advertising are thrown out in using the image of humans with my experience. “Advertising often turns people into objects.” Many women and men’s bodies are used to sell of a product. Feelings are made more depressing when you see ads with the “Perfect Women Body.” When I see TV an there is the skinny, slim women presented on the TV, I think “Wow, I want to have a body like that.” I think women think of these more since “The Models” are presented as the perfect women.” The self-esteem of girls plummets as they reach adolescence partly because they cannot possibly escape the message that their bodies are objects, and imperfect objects at that.”
This is true since after watching TV I tell my mom “I want to get plastic surgery to have a nice body.” Humans are washed out with been skinny and having this perfect body with out noticing, that the only thing that matters is the feelings and what’s inside not out.
I agree with Kilbourne that products in advertising are thrown out in using the image of humans with my experience. “Advertising often turns people into objects.” Many women and men’s bodies are used to sell of a product. Feelings are made more depressing when you see ads with the “Perfect Women Body.” When I see TV an there is the skinny, slim women presented on the TV, I think “Wow, I want to have a body like that.” I think women think of these more since “The Models” are presented as the perfect women.” The self-esteem of girls plummets as they reach adolescence partly because they cannot possibly escape the message that their bodies are objects, and imperfect objects at that.”
This is true since after watching TV I tell my mom “I want to get plastic surgery to have a nice body.” Humans are washed out with been skinny and having this perfect body with out noticing, that the only thing that matters is the feelings and what’s inside not out.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Reading Response #6
In the article “Jesus is a brand of jeans” by Jean Kilbourne she fears that advertisements are “exploiting our human emotions and replacing them with inanimate objects.” In other words Kilbourne believes that advertisers are praying on our feelings and insecurities and using them to get us to buy more stuff we don’t need. Feel fat buy this product to make you skinny, feel lonely buy this product to make friends or lovers, feel sad buy this product to make you happy, feel happy buy this product to capture the moment, and the list could go on and on. There is an unending amount of items out there marketed to cure almost every humane ailment imaginable.
Kilbourne reminds us that advertisers will go to any length to capture consumers and sell their product. Poaching on the young the old, big or small, even on the sick and addicted, she states “the addict is the ideal consumer” Meaning who better to buy your product than someone hooked on it. So the advertising agencies go to extremes to know their consumer and the best ways to hook them and she states “hook them early they are yours for life.” So if ads are made directed at children and young adults like fuzzy camels and smoking cowboys to the new amped up alcoholic energy drinks. They can have an addiction started before they are even old enough to buy the product. End result equals more years of buying product which means bigger profit.
I agree with Kilbourne that advertisements are meant to make us feel like we should buy their products to replace our feelings with something inanimate because of my own experiences with inanimate objects and human emotions. She mentions cigarettes and says “when I was a smoker, I felt that cigarettes were my friends.” I celebrate the fact that she said this because when I was a smoker I felt exactly that way too. When no one else was around at least they were. Even to this day I still miss them and sometimes think about them. But when I have succumbed to the desire and have had one I remember why we are not best buddies anymore but I am sure after hanging out for a while we could chum up right quick.
Did advertisements do this to me? I am sure in a long tangled web of consumer culture and this media based frenzy to all be uniquely the same my addictions and millions of other people’s addictions at some point were a consideration for some advertising executive’s decision on how to market a product. So here we are a nation of consumers perfectly primed to be little buying machines. Buy something use it a while than its time to replace it, upgrade it, or get rid of it for the next new thing that comes along. Rarely do I actually throw something away because It actually wore out or was all used up. And what does that say about me and my habits? Maybe the only things I actually need to buy are those things that actually did wear out or were empty. Maybe I should follow through with this idea and try this theory out or maybe not.
Kilbourne reminds us that advertisers will go to any length to capture consumers and sell their product. Poaching on the young the old, big or small, even on the sick and addicted, she states “the addict is the ideal consumer” Meaning who better to buy your product than someone hooked on it. So the advertising agencies go to extremes to know their consumer and the best ways to hook them and she states “hook them early they are yours for life.” So if ads are made directed at children and young adults like fuzzy camels and smoking cowboys to the new amped up alcoholic energy drinks. They can have an addiction started before they are even old enough to buy the product. End result equals more years of buying product which means bigger profit.
I agree with Kilbourne that advertisements are meant to make us feel like we should buy their products to replace our feelings with something inanimate because of my own experiences with inanimate objects and human emotions. She mentions cigarettes and says “when I was a smoker, I felt that cigarettes were my friends.” I celebrate the fact that she said this because when I was a smoker I felt exactly that way too. When no one else was around at least they were. Even to this day I still miss them and sometimes think about them. But when I have succumbed to the desire and have had one I remember why we are not best buddies anymore but I am sure after hanging out for a while we could chum up right quick.
Did advertisements do this to me? I am sure in a long tangled web of consumer culture and this media based frenzy to all be uniquely the same my addictions and millions of other people’s addictions at some point were a consideration for some advertising executive’s decision on how to market a product. So here we are a nation of consumers perfectly primed to be little buying machines. Buy something use it a while than its time to replace it, upgrade it, or get rid of it for the next new thing that comes along. Rarely do I actually throw something away because It actually wore out or was all used up. And what does that say about me and my habits? Maybe the only things I actually need to buy are those things that actually did wear out or were empty. Maybe I should follow through with this idea and try this theory out or maybe not.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Reading Response #5
In Robert Scholes essay “On Reading a Video Text” he explains how to understand a video text by sharing he’s ideas on ideological criticism and cultural reinforcement. Supporting and enhancing our ideology or our strong belief system is cultural reinforcement. Scholes explains that in order to understand the commercial like the Budweiser commercial he uses in his essay we need to understand the structure of baseball. He elaborates that by living in America we obtain this cultural knowledge. By understanding the well known cultural game of baseball Scholes explains how it reinforces our cultural belief by being a part of it.
One of these cultural beliefs is that America works. Scholes writes: we root for the umpire because we want the system to work not just baseball but the whole thing: America.” By understanding the cultural reinforcement the commercial sells the beer to the audience by selling the “American Way” first. Then the commercial try’s to sell the beer by connecting the nation to the product creating a “national beer for the national pastime” (Scholes 1989).
The minute long McDonalds commercial starts out with two well known professional NBA basketball stars Dwight Howard and LeBron James. Dwight Howard is practicing on a basketball court in Indianapolis at Conseco Field house when LeBron James comes in with his McDonalds lunch that contains a Big Mac and Fries. Then Dwight says he will play him for his lunch and that the first one to miss their shoot watches the other one eat. LeBron agrees put his lunch on the seat and they both begin the trick-shot competition for the Big Mac and fries. They exchange and perform tricks until Dwight Howard Brakes the hoop while performing his 360 free throw line Olympic style landing shot. That is when a white male starts clapping and saying “great show guys and thanks for lunch” after eating the last French fry and walking off leaving Dwight Howard and LeBron James confused.
This ad is not only trying to convince you to buy McDonalds food but it is also trying to convince us that the McDonalds food is for the hard working class. This McDonalds commercial does this by having two black NBA stars play each other for the Big Mac and Fries. By living in America we should know that it is harder for people of color to succeed in life. So we should know that Dwight Howard and LeBron James must have worked very hard to get to where they are. Having a male dressed in a nice suite at the end of the commercial eating the McDonalds lunch also portrays that he is a hard worker and the McDonalds lunch was right for him.
In order to understand this commercial you need to know that these are not just ordinary basketball players but they are professional NBA stars and by living in America where basketball is popular you should have this cultural knowledge. You should also know that these two NBA basketball players must have worked hard to get to where they are now because it wasn’t always easy for black people to succeed in life living in America.
By combining the hard working class and McDonalds food in the 60 second commercial it reinforces the cultural narrative/ myth that working hard and giving your best pays off at the end. The commercial reinforces that in order to succeed in life you have to give it everything you’ve got.
In Robert Scholes essay “On Reading a Video Text” he explains how to understand a video text by sharing he’s ideas on ideological criticism and cultural reinforcement. Supporting and enhancing our ideology or our strong belief system is cultural reinforcement. Scholes explains that in order to understand the commercial like the Budweiser commercial he uses in his essay we need to understand the structure of baseball. He elaborates that by living in America we obtain this cultural knowledge. By understanding the well known cultural game of baseball Scholes explains how it reinforces our cultural belief by being a part of it.
One of these cultural beliefs is that America works. Scholes writes: we root for the umpire because we want the system to work not just baseball but the whole thing: America.” By understanding the cultural reinforcement the commercial sells the beer to the audience by selling the “American Way” first. Then the commercial try’s to sell the beer by connecting the nation to the product creating a “national beer for the national pastime” (Scholes 1989).
The minute long McDonalds commercial starts out with two well known professional NBA basketball stars Dwight Howard and LeBron James. Dwight Howard is practicing on a basketball court in Indianapolis at Conseco Field house when LeBron James comes in with his McDonalds lunch that contains a Big Mac and Fries. Then Dwight says he will play him for his lunch and that the first one to miss their shoot watches the other one eat. LeBron agrees put his lunch on the seat and they both begin the trick-shot competition for the Big Mac and fries. They exchange and perform tricks until Dwight Howard Brakes the hoop while performing his 360 free throw line Olympic style landing shot. That is when a white male starts clapping and saying “great show guys and thanks for lunch” after eating the last French fry and walking off leaving Dwight Howard and LeBron James confused.
This ad is not only trying to convince you to buy McDonalds food but it is also trying to convince us that the McDonalds food is for the hard working class. This McDonalds commercial does this by having two black NBA stars play each other for the Big Mac and Fries. By living in America we should know that it is harder for people of color to succeed in life. So we should know that Dwight Howard and LeBron James must have worked very hard to get to where they are. Having a male dressed in a nice suite at the end of the commercial eating the McDonalds lunch also portrays that he is a hard worker and the McDonalds lunch was right for him.
In order to understand this commercial you need to know that these are not just ordinary basketball players but they are professional NBA stars and by living in America where basketball is popular you should have this cultural knowledge. You should also know that these two NBA basketball players must have worked hard to get to where they are now because it wasn’t always easy for black people to succeed in life living in America.
By combining the hard working class and McDonalds food in the 60 second commercial it reinforces the cultural narrative/ myth that working hard and giving your best pays off at the end. The commercial reinforces that in order to succeed in life you have to give it everything you’ve got.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Reading Response #5
As technology becomes more intertwined with the daily lives of individuals today the power of video texts has greatly increased. In the essay “On Reading a Video Text” be scholar Robert Scholes emphasizes the power of this kind of text and to explain his point dissects a commercial and explains his analysis on it. In his demonstration of a commercial analysis Scholes uses a Budweiser commercial to convey his point. His demonstration shows how in certain video texts we need to have cultural understanding like traditions and well known stories like “rags to riches”. Scholes also points out that with some commercials it sells more then just the product. In his example of the Budweiser commercial it is about an umpire at a baseball game making calls and he gets criticized by his decisions but sticks to his opinion. Scholes states “We root for the umpire because we want the system to work-not just baseball but the whole thing:
After reading this essay, I watched a music video “Stupid Girls” by singer Pink and wanted to dissect and grasp the full concept of the video. In the video Pink demonstrates how the women today are being critiqued and judged by society. The video starts out with a little girl sitting on the couch with a Barbie watching TV. As she flips through the channels she starts to see various videos that demonstrate what society’s women of today strive for. Pink expresses this by showing what women today find beautiful, how a nice tan, a big chest, and being skinny are desired. She uses different scandals and well known stereotypes to convey her point such as the Paris Hilton sex tape scandal, the longing to own a chi Wawa dog, bulimic girls and even the Barbie the little girl is holding in the beginning. Pink implies how women today are becoming very superficial and points out that women have lost many ambitions in her lyrics she even states “What happened to the dreams of a girl president, she’s dancing in the video next to 50 cent”. I think that Pink makes a very interesting point in this song and video and she does a good job communicating to her audience her main point. With the help of Scholes it was interesting for me to breakdown a video with better understanding, to see more of the whole picture that Pink was trying to express. I believe Pinks main point to be not just how women today are becoming “stupid” but that as women long for superficial perfection and acceptance they loose who they really are and become fake and are ultimately unhappy. At the end of the video the TV turns off and the little girl has a decision; to either play with her dolls or go outside and play football, she chooses the football.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Reading Respons #5: System of a Down: BYOB
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUzd9KyIDrM
During my high school years, I learned of a band called System of a Down. System of a Down is a band who provides a no care attitude with the messages they choose to convey with their music. The lyrics to their songs are edgy, and their songs tackle many of the political/ social issues that surround America today such as America’s involvement in the Iraq war, government influences on society (propaganda) , and Hollywood’s social effect on society. Their music videos help them convey their messages into rich video texts, and System of a Down do not disappoint their fans as their music videos help fans to try to see the real truths of America. The song “BYOB” or Bring “Your Own Bomb” is a great song to help listeners take into consideration the American military and the governments actions/roles in the military. This song helps paint a picture of a different America and this song presents the issues which are aimed towards Americas involvement in the Iraq war.
Being able to read video texts such as music videos will help oneself really see the message that the artist wishes to convey to their listeners. In the article “On Reading a Video Text” by Robert Scholes, Scholes explains the effects of video texts and how video texts should be analyzed carefully, especially in a society that is full of them. Scholes goes on to explain that Video texts help provide society with a format of viewing to help entertain society. Video texts help engage the viewers mind by providing visual images to make a viewer’s brain comprehend and assume the purposes of the video texts. Scholes explains the concept of culture reinforcement, and Scholes uses the idea of cultural reinforcement to convey the idea set that America loves to push the ideas of the American dreams to be true. Basically America loves to sell America. Scholes explains the concept of cultural reinforcement by stating, “By cultural reinforcement, I mean the process through which video texts confirm viewers in their ideological positions and reassure them as to their membership in a collective cultural body”. Scholes basically states that American video texts,(especially commercials) like to push the concept of the American dream and these video texts can push the ideological views that the government wishes to convey to the people. The ideological views that America is a great country and America is a place where you can start from nothing and get somewhere. These views of America are challenged in the video “BYOB”.
“BYOB” or “Bring Your Own Bomb” was made during the time when America was fighting in the Iraq War, and the music video sets the stage for controversy behind the Iraq war and the government involvement (or non involvement) in the war. The video starts out with these military like individuals marching, and these individuals are wearing paintball masks. On these paintball masks there are words displayed on them such as Die, Obey, and Buy. This could symbolize how the military is ran by the government as these soldier like individual are conveying messages perhaps a government would want to instill on its people through propaganda. As the band is marching through the streets, System of a Down is playing the song. But as the chorus starts, the video moves to a party where everyone is dancing and having a good time (as the lyrics suggest). Then eventually the military like people break into the party and start subduing the people. Which could demonstrate the idea of the government imposing its will on the people and essentially limiting our rights (or the people having a good time). Then towards the end of the video, the party people (and the band) are also wearing these masks with the same messages conveyed on them as the soldier like individuals do. This is where the assumption can be made that the government uses tactics such as propaganda to help brainwash and subdue the people in this country. The government wants people to think the way the governments wants them to think. By this I mean the governments wants the people to follow its rules and follow their system of tasks without the people interfering with their personal lives. In the main chorus of the song its states, “Why do they always send the poor? Barbarism by Barbaras, With pointed heels, victorious victories kneel,
For brand new spanking' deals., Marching forward hypocritic and hypnotic computers, you depending on our protection, yet you feed us lies from the tabletop.” These lyrics help convey the message that the System of a Down wants the view to consider. To break it down, “why do they always send the poor?” is a reference to the lack of higher class individuals in the military. “barbarism by Barbaras” and “with pointed heels” basically references Barbara Bush. “Victorious victories kneel, for brand new spankin’ deals” references the mass consumerism in this country and role is has on the people. “Marching forward hypocritic and hypnotic computer” references to issues with technology and the abuse of technology in our country. The hypocritic probably references to the politicians or the government itself. Finally “you depend on our protection, yet you feed us lies from the tabletop”, basically references to how it is the people of the country who are fighting these wars that the government engages in. In return the government chooses to
“feed us lies from the tabletop”, which states how the government chooses not to disclose information to its people or lie to them about scandals and other issues in this country.
Basically this song wants the viewer to look at this alternate version of America, and System wants the viewer to think twice about the governments role in our daily. The idea is to think as an individual, especially when it comes to media presented in the form of video texts.
During my high school years, I learned of a band called System of a Down. System of a Down is a band who provides a no care attitude with the messages they choose to convey with their music. The lyrics to their songs are edgy, and their songs tackle many of the political/ social issues that surround America today such as America’s involvement in the Iraq war, government influences on society (propaganda) , and Hollywood’s social effect on society. Their music videos help them convey their messages into rich video texts, and System of a Down do not disappoint their fans as their music videos help fans to try to see the real truths of America. The song “BYOB” or Bring “Your Own Bomb” is a great song to help listeners take into consideration the American military and the governments actions/roles in the military. This song helps paint a picture of a different America and this song presents the issues which are aimed towards Americas involvement in the Iraq war.
Being able to read video texts such as music videos will help oneself really see the message that the artist wishes to convey to their listeners. In the article “On Reading a Video Text” by Robert Scholes, Scholes explains the effects of video texts and how video texts should be analyzed carefully, especially in a society that is full of them. Scholes goes on to explain that Video texts help provide society with a format of viewing to help entertain society. Video texts help engage the viewers mind by providing visual images to make a viewer’s brain comprehend and assume the purposes of the video texts. Scholes explains the concept of culture reinforcement, and Scholes uses the idea of cultural reinforcement to convey the idea set that America loves to push the ideas of the American dreams to be true. Basically America loves to sell America. Scholes explains the concept of cultural reinforcement by stating, “By cultural reinforcement, I mean the process through which video texts confirm viewers in their ideological positions and reassure them as to their membership in a collective cultural body”. Scholes basically states that American video texts,(especially commercials) like to push the concept of the American dream and these video texts can push the ideological views that the government wishes to convey to the people. The ideological views that America is a great country and America is a place where you can start from nothing and get somewhere. These views of America are challenged in the video “BYOB”.
“BYOB” or “Bring Your Own Bomb” was made during the time when America was fighting in the Iraq War, and the music video sets the stage for controversy behind the Iraq war and the government involvement (or non involvement) in the war. The video starts out with these military like individuals marching, and these individuals are wearing paintball masks. On these paintball masks there are words displayed on them such as Die, Obey, and Buy. This could symbolize how the military is ran by the government as these soldier like individual are conveying messages perhaps a government would want to instill on its people through propaganda. As the band is marching through the streets, System of a Down is playing the song. But as the chorus starts, the video moves to a party where everyone is dancing and having a good time (as the lyrics suggest). Then eventually the military like people break into the party and start subduing the people. Which could demonstrate the idea of the government imposing its will on the people and essentially limiting our rights (or the people having a good time). Then towards the end of the video, the party people (and the band) are also wearing these masks with the same messages conveyed on them as the soldier like individuals do. This is where the assumption can be made that the government uses tactics such as propaganda to help brainwash and subdue the people in this country. The government wants people to think the way the governments wants them to think. By this I mean the governments wants the people to follow its rules and follow their system of tasks without the people interfering with their personal lives. In the main chorus of the song its states, “Why do they always send the poor? Barbarism by Barbaras, With pointed heels, victorious victories kneel,
For brand new spanking' deals., Marching forward hypocritic and hypnotic computers, you depending on our protection, yet you feed us lies from the tabletop.” These lyrics help convey the message that the System of a Down wants the view to consider. To break it down, “why do they always send the poor?” is a reference to the lack of higher class individuals in the military. “barbarism by Barbaras” and “with pointed heels” basically references Barbara Bush. “Victorious victories kneel, for brand new spankin’ deals” references the mass consumerism in this country and role is has on the people. “Marching forward hypocritic and hypnotic computer” references to issues with technology and the abuse of technology in our country. The hypocritic probably references to the politicians or the government itself. Finally “you depend on our protection, yet you feed us lies from the tabletop”, basically references to how it is the people of the country who are fighting these wars that the government engages in. In return the government chooses to
“feed us lies from the tabletop”, which states how the government chooses not to disclose information to its people or lie to them about scandals and other issues in this country.
Basically this song wants the viewer to look at this alternate version of America, and System wants the viewer to think twice about the governments role in our daily. The idea is to think as an individual, especially when it comes to media presented in the form of video texts.
Reading Responce #5 - Stupid Girls
The music video “stupid girl” by P!nk is all about its name. This video starts off with a little girl watching a class of woman students all sitting . Soon enough, beside the little girl appear the angel version of p!nk and the devil p!nk and begin to murmur “stupid girl“ to the little girl sitting on the couch. The television starts off with a teacher and all the female students are mocking the teacher as she waves her hair as if they are being taught how to do it. The little girl flips her hair as the girls on TV and proceeds to change the channel. Next appears p!nk in a suit and sings “What happened to the dream of a girl president She's dancing in the video next to 50 Cent,” next of course appeared p!nk dancing her butt next to the rapper 50 cent. The rest of the video continues to ridicule the life of young women today that don’t really go far in life or spend their life fixing their bodies. The point of the video is to show how young women today care more tanning, being skinny and getting plastic surgery. P!nk does a really good job at portraying her thoughts about the stupid things girls so such as become bulimic just to stay skinny, spray tan just to be darker, and degrade themselves to be half naked on a public music video. I clearly see P!nk’s view in all this nonsense going on in our generation. “I'm so glad that I'll never fit in That will never be me Outcasts and girls with ambition That's what I wanna see” P!nk argues. Her claim justifies how much she wants to see smart girls not trying to fit the “perfect picture” but try to use their traits that they are born with for the better. It seems as if girls do these things to impress boys or to feel better about themselves but I think P!nk wrote this song and made this video to show girls how stupid doing those things are. Girls should not humiliate themselves for other people. A lot of the things girls now a days can cause skin caner by tanning, serious eating disorders and dishonor themselves by being put out in public in the wrong situations or even have problems with our health due to plastic surgery. This music video is funny, yet it teaches valuable lesson of how silly girls look by trying to be something they aren’t. The lesson that should be learned by watching this video is that we should love ourselves for who we are not who we think we should be. “Stupid girls” is dedicated to all those insecure girls who think they have to fix themselves of think they are better than others. In reality we are all the same and it should not matter if we are fat, skinny, dark, rich or poor. In the end, we are all woman with different bodies but we were are all born in our unique way for a reason and we shouldn’t have to change it just to please other people.
1984 - By Apple
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8&feature=related
The vast majority of people in the US watch television and absorb the commercials without giving much thought to the actual reasoning behind the careful placement of everything that is actually going on in the ad. In his essay “On Reading Video Text” Robert Scholes suggests it’s both interesting and important to give it some thought on a deeper level. Scholes believes video has a unique manipulative power over the way we view it. In using certain colors, music even culturally understood narratives as an undertone the videographers can conjure particular emotions in us. Scholes quantifies the use of cultural narrative as “The process through which video texts confirm viewers by their ideological positions and reassure them as to their membership in a collective cultural body”. Scholes then describes a Budweiser commercial in which a black umpire rises up and “makes it”. Scholes goes on to explain in detail the reasoning behind why we understand the commercial and why we side with the umpire. The main reason the general public can understand this commercial Scholes accredits to the fact that it’s a cliché story of the American dream.
With Scholes’ ideas of breaking down video texts in mind I recently watched a classic apple commercial. It was quite interesting after breaking it down piece by piece. In this commercial they were selling more than just a product but an idea. The commercial opened up with a drab colorless group of people marching together in perfect rhythm down a narrow corridor. The people who were marching had a very inhuman quality to them, appearing not as people but as automatons marching mindlessly. In the background there is a seemingly brainwashing voice spouting out promises of unity and idealistic benefits of conformity. The voice then materializes in the form of a face on a screen being not only watched but stared at by the marchers of the previous scene. The video then cuts to a woman carrying a sledgehammer and clad in the only color of the entire commercial other than a shade of gray, a beacon of hope, our savior. The woman is being chased by soldiers in riot gear, the strong arm of the dictatorship that is the man on the screen. The woman arrives to the screen, heaves her sledge-hammer and in a flash of brilliant light the over-mind is gone, the heroine has prevailed in saving us from the clutches of big brother. After the commotion of the commercial there is a voice stating “On January 24th apple will release Macintosh and you’ll see why 1984 won’t be 1984”.
The reference at this point is quite obviously “1984” a novel by George Orwell, a novel which depicts people conforming to follow an over-mind known as “Big Brother”. The commercial is instantly identifiable because the novel has become commonplace in high school English classes and is a culturally renowned work in the US. It is because we have this understanding that the commercial makes sense.
The commercial is designed to put ourselves into the role of the automaton, waiting helplessly to be saved by Mactintosh (the hammer-wielding heroine). I do find it kind of ironic that the point they’re trying to sell is that if we don’t want to become automatons, slaves to conformity, we should all go out and buy a mac. Irony aside the commercial still had a powerful quality to it, placing the viewing in their role in society. I’m not going out to buy a mac today, I’m a PC guy, I guess big brother will be watching me, but it was an interesting piece of film nonetheless.
The vast majority of people in the US watch television and absorb the commercials without giving much thought to the actual reasoning behind the careful placement of everything that is actually going on in the ad. In his essay “On Reading Video Text” Robert Scholes suggests it’s both interesting and important to give it some thought on a deeper level. Scholes believes video has a unique manipulative power over the way we view it. In using certain colors, music even culturally understood narratives as an undertone the videographers can conjure particular emotions in us. Scholes quantifies the use of cultural narrative as “The process through which video texts confirm viewers by their ideological positions and reassure them as to their membership in a collective cultural body”. Scholes then describes a Budweiser commercial in which a black umpire rises up and “makes it”. Scholes goes on to explain in detail the reasoning behind why we understand the commercial and why we side with the umpire. The main reason the general public can understand this commercial Scholes accredits to the fact that it’s a cliché story of the American dream.
With Scholes’ ideas of breaking down video texts in mind I recently watched a classic apple commercial. It was quite interesting after breaking it down piece by piece. In this commercial they were selling more than just a product but an idea. The commercial opened up with a drab colorless group of people marching together in perfect rhythm down a narrow corridor. The people who were marching had a very inhuman quality to them, appearing not as people but as automatons marching mindlessly. In the background there is a seemingly brainwashing voice spouting out promises of unity and idealistic benefits of conformity. The voice then materializes in the form of a face on a screen being not only watched but stared at by the marchers of the previous scene. The video then cuts to a woman carrying a sledgehammer and clad in the only color of the entire commercial other than a shade of gray, a beacon of hope, our savior. The woman is being chased by soldiers in riot gear, the strong arm of the dictatorship that is the man on the screen. The woman arrives to the screen, heaves her sledge-hammer and in a flash of brilliant light the over-mind is gone, the heroine has prevailed in saving us from the clutches of big brother. After the commotion of the commercial there is a voice stating “On January 24th apple will release Macintosh and you’ll see why 1984 won’t be 1984”.
The reference at this point is quite obviously “1984” a novel by George Orwell, a novel which depicts people conforming to follow an over-mind known as “Big Brother”. The commercial is instantly identifiable because the novel has become commonplace in high school English classes and is a culturally renowned work in the US. It is because we have this understanding that the commercial makes sense.
The commercial is designed to put ourselves into the role of the automaton, waiting helplessly to be saved by Mactintosh (the hammer-wielding heroine). I do find it kind of ironic that the point they’re trying to sell is that if we don’t want to become automatons, slaves to conformity, we should all go out and buy a mac. Irony aside the commercial still had a powerful quality to it, placing the viewing in their role in society. I’m not going out to buy a mac today, I’m a PC guy, I guess big brother will be watching me, but it was an interesting piece of film nonetheless.
Commerical
Part 1
When watching commercials, I sometimes thing, what is the point? Or why was this put in here? Now from reading Robert Scholes article, On Reading a Video Text, I understand that everything in a commercial or advertisement has its reason. Even just the random dog in the corner has its part in making the commercial what it is. Scholes in his essay said “Others include narrativity and what I should like to call, at least tentatively, cultural reinforcement… By cultural reinforcement, I mean the process through which video texts confirm viewers in their ideological positions and reassure them as to their membership in a collective cultural body.” By this I feel he means that things in commercials are pit there because it relates back to our culture and just by living in this country you will get the commercial.
Part 2
The commercial I watched was the new Super bowl commercial about the new Chrysler car. This commercial features Eminem. It starts off in Detroit and talks about how as a city it has gone to hell and back. This commercial also reimburses the fact of American made. In the end of the ad it says “Imported from America”; this is trying to show that this is made in America for Americans.
This ad sells the fact that it isn’t being made overseas or by the Chinese, but made in the heart of America, in our own backyard. This is effective because it shows that people are making it for us and in our country. Today, you can’t find many products like cars, which are made in America. Another thing it makes you think about is that your car is made here and Americans made it. So, in our hard economy, Chrysler is creating jobs in America when other car companies are outsourcing to Japan or somewhere else that is not America.
One part in the commercial is says “When it comes to luxury, Its as much about where it’s from as who it’s for” this comes back to being made in America and made the right way in America. It makes you think that you don’t know who your car is made by and in what conditions with other car companies.
This ad requires you to know that Chrysler is an only America car company, but from the commercial you end up getting that information, so you don’t actually have to know it.
Newport Cigarette commercial
Newport Cigarette Commercial
On “Reading a video text,” by Robert Scholes, he talks about the cultural knowledge that we viewers, already know even when we haven’t experienced whatever it may be at all. For example, we know that horses or dogs have nothing to do with alcohol or that cigarettes have nothing to do with smoking. Yet, some people still fall for it. Scholes also says that video text come in many different forms and have a different affect for each one. “Close-ups position us where we could never stand. Slow motion allows us an extraordinary penetration into the mechanics of movement, and, combined with music; lends a balletic grace to ordinary forms of locomotion.”(Scholes) This quote is basically saying that those who produce the adds, add on many different kind of focus. When the ad is in slow music with some maybe melodic music in the background, it can lead us to have maybe a different view on the ad.
I had chosen an ad called, “Newport Cigarette Commercial,” which was trying to make people buy Newport Cigarettes instead of any other brand. In this ad, they showed a woman at a beach with another man smoking Newport Cigarettes. The woman was wearing a short dress and looked all fresh. The Cultural Knowledge in this ad was the things that every person already knew even when they don’t even smoke cigarettes. First of all, people know that by smoking Newport cigarettes, you won’t be “fresh,” or you won’t have a beautiful woman or even be on the beach. To the man that was walking by the billboard, he thought that the billboard was alive because it was singing to him and the bus driver that came to pick him up, thought he was a bit crazy.
The ad is trying to make the audience believe that no other brand is better than the Newport brand and no other brand is fresher or tastier and that attractive women smoke the Newport cigarettes as well. What I don’t like about any ad not only this one in particular, is that whatever they are trying to sell, whether it be cigarettes or alcohol, they make it all seem so good and innocent. But when you look on the negative side of everything, these things can actually kill you or give cancer.
I think that Robert Scholes had done an excellent job with his article because he talks about the things people already know without having to experience because we seem to be constantly around all of these thing and know enough about them. He also talks about the common sense that people as well. Everything that he had said in the article come together in this ad because it proves to you that by adding certain music, people, beauty, etc., they can grab peoples attention and so the next time a person is in the store, they think about the commercial they’ve seen and end up buying that product. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPCMnZ-1HNE
On “Reading a video text,” by Robert Scholes, he talks about the cultural knowledge that we viewers, already know even when we haven’t experienced whatever it may be at all. For example, we know that horses or dogs have nothing to do with alcohol or that cigarettes have nothing to do with smoking. Yet, some people still fall for it. Scholes also says that video text come in many different forms and have a different affect for each one. “Close-ups position us where we could never stand. Slow motion allows us an extraordinary penetration into the mechanics of movement, and, combined with music; lends a balletic grace to ordinary forms of locomotion.”(Scholes) This quote is basically saying that those who produce the adds, add on many different kind of focus. When the ad is in slow music with some maybe melodic music in the background, it can lead us to have maybe a different view on the ad.
I had chosen an ad called, “Newport Cigarette Commercial,” which was trying to make people buy Newport Cigarettes instead of any other brand. In this ad, they showed a woman at a beach with another man smoking Newport Cigarettes. The woman was wearing a short dress and looked all fresh. The Cultural Knowledge in this ad was the things that every person already knew even when they don’t even smoke cigarettes. First of all, people know that by smoking Newport cigarettes, you won’t be “fresh,” or you won’t have a beautiful woman or even be on the beach. To the man that was walking by the billboard, he thought that the billboard was alive because it was singing to him and the bus driver that came to pick him up, thought he was a bit crazy.
The ad is trying to make the audience believe that no other brand is better than the Newport brand and no other brand is fresher or tastier and that attractive women smoke the Newport cigarettes as well. What I don’t like about any ad not only this one in particular, is that whatever they are trying to sell, whether it be cigarettes or alcohol, they make it all seem so good and innocent. But when you look on the negative side of everything, these things can actually kill you or give cancer.
I think that Robert Scholes had done an excellent job with his article because he talks about the things people already know without having to experience because we seem to be constantly around all of these thing and know enough about them. He also talks about the common sense that people as well. Everything that he had said in the article come together in this ad because it proves to you that by adding certain music, people, beauty, etc., they can grab peoples attention and so the next time a person is in the store, they think about the commercial they’ve seen and end up buying that product. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPCMnZ-1HNE
READING RESPONSE 5
Blake Shelton: Who Are You When I’m Not Lookin’? –Music Video;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xXD9-1mLBY
• He sings from the bedroom on a bed
• The first girl walks out in her robe, tank top, and underwear
• She is in the kitchen making breakfast
o She burns the toast & bacon
o Making coffee and OJ
• Each scene has a different woman in a different role
o Blonde; making breakfast-kitchen
o Brunette; dancing around-living room
o Mixed; working-office
• The things women to do release stress
• Recognition of what women do
This music video starts out with a blonde women walking into the kitchen in her robe and tank top with underwear. She pours herself some oj and starts to make coffee, then proceeds to make breakfast. The scene switches and so does the women, what the women are doing in the video are closely acted along with the words of the song. The brunette girl now has a class with what looks like alcohol on ice, and it shows her dancing around in her socks. The next scene is a mixed woman in an office. The scenes switch to show what each lady is doing when he sings the part “who are you when I’m not looking.” Their acting continues with the words of the song, and the song ends by seeing him sitting on the bed playing his guitar just as it started, and it slowly fades out.
The narrative that I see being portrayed is that women are allowed to have bad days, and that women have their secrets about how they relieve their stress. This video does a very good job of showing that there are different types of women that do different things and not all of them are as perfect as they may seem. The oppositions that are presented are tame/wild, the blonde cooking breakfast, and the brunette dancing around after a drink. Men are left out of the video this song pertains to women and the things that they do. They all look around the same age not old and not super young; they look like they are about in their mid-twenties. There is a working girl, and girl who doesn’t mind being silly, and a girl who seems to enjoy cooking, and it’s ok if she messes up. The houses appear to be nice homes, not much low income is shown, and the lady working, looks as though she has a nice job that probably makes a fair amount of money. That this song is not being derogatory to women, it is showing their beautiful, hidden sides that they most of the time try to maintain and keep to themselves. The cultural assumptions that I feel are shown are that country music tends to be less derogatory towards women and they like to show the ways that they feel about women. The music itself is calmer and not angry. It contributes a lot to the meaning of the text because it just shows more of what he is trying to say through his words of the song, and the video does a very nice job of following what the words are saying and showing the image that Shelton is trying to make. The musical component of the text influences my reading because I try to look more at the picture that the author is trying to get across rather than just reading the words straight from the page. I try to relate better to the text I am reading.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xXD9-1mLBY
• He sings from the bedroom on a bed
• The first girl walks out in her robe, tank top, and underwear
• She is in the kitchen making breakfast
o She burns the toast & bacon
o Making coffee and OJ
• Each scene has a different woman in a different role
o Blonde; making breakfast-kitchen
o Brunette; dancing around-living room
o Mixed; working-office
• The things women to do release stress
• Recognition of what women do
This music video starts out with a blonde women walking into the kitchen in her robe and tank top with underwear. She pours herself some oj and starts to make coffee, then proceeds to make breakfast. The scene switches and so does the women, what the women are doing in the video are closely acted along with the words of the song. The brunette girl now has a class with what looks like alcohol on ice, and it shows her dancing around in her socks. The next scene is a mixed woman in an office. The scenes switch to show what each lady is doing when he sings the part “who are you when I’m not looking.” Their acting continues with the words of the song, and the song ends by seeing him sitting on the bed playing his guitar just as it started, and it slowly fades out.
The narrative that I see being portrayed is that women are allowed to have bad days, and that women have their secrets about how they relieve their stress. This video does a very good job of showing that there are different types of women that do different things and not all of them are as perfect as they may seem. The oppositions that are presented are tame/wild, the blonde cooking breakfast, and the brunette dancing around after a drink. Men are left out of the video this song pertains to women and the things that they do. They all look around the same age not old and not super young; they look like they are about in their mid-twenties. There is a working girl, and girl who doesn’t mind being silly, and a girl who seems to enjoy cooking, and it’s ok if she messes up. The houses appear to be nice homes, not much low income is shown, and the lady working, looks as though she has a nice job that probably makes a fair amount of money. That this song is not being derogatory to women, it is showing their beautiful, hidden sides that they most of the time try to maintain and keep to themselves. The cultural assumptions that I feel are shown are that country music tends to be less derogatory towards women and they like to show the ways that they feel about women. The music itself is calmer and not angry. It contributes a lot to the meaning of the text because it just shows more of what he is trying to say through his words of the song, and the video does a very nice job of following what the words are saying and showing the image that Shelton is trying to make. The musical component of the text influences my reading because I try to look more at the picture that the author is trying to get across rather than just reading the words straight from the page. I try to relate better to the text I am reading.
Reading Response #5
Commercials appear every time someone is watching TV. You will never find a program without commercials left out. When I watch TV I would be like “What’s the point of the commercial” or “Who cares, what they are trying to promote.” Many of us watch commercials without thinking what are the real significance in to what’s it trying to do. After reading the article “On Reading a Video Text” I understand how commercials are connected to people and how each part that is showed in a video text actually means something. By just, a little thing showed in a video text it can mean or even say something to relate it to what the video text is selling you. Scholes believes that a video text has its ways to manipulate people in order for us to view it differently. “By, cultural reinforcement, I mean the process trough which video texts confirm viewers in their ideological positions and reassure them…which operates in the ethical-political realm, is an extremely important element of video textuality…..an extremely important dimension of all the mass media.” Scholes is explaining is the producers have a good attention of people in what they are promoting they think that they are doing well. They show it to the media to brain wash us the humans. Scholes uses this quote to explain the Budweiser commercial. Were he tells the story of how they connect a man with baseball and how his life changed with Budweiser. He goes on telling us why we should understand the meaning of this commercial and how it makes a part to the “American Dream.”
The commercial that I choose to use and watch is a Corona Commercial in Spanish with English words translating on what its saying. In this commercial ad it starts of by showing a man dancing in a club. There are a whole lot of people in their dancing with groups of people and there is one guy who is dancing alone who no one pays attention to. The DJ tells him what kind of dance is that, and begins telling him how he doesn’t have the rhythm to dance. The Corona commercial is not only trying to sell you of this special brand of beer but, looking at it closely is actually telling you more than what it’s written on the text. In the ad it shows many young people but, also an old lady. Its telling you that it doesn’t matter what age or type of person you are, Corona beer would make people want you. It also shows both gender of women and men with beer on their hand and having a good time. This video is not leaving out certain people in this ad, its showing connections. When you see the video it shows you, that you will have a good time no matter who you are and with whom, as long as there is a beer on your side you’ll be great. The commercial is changing how someone is by giving him beer and making him something that he’s not. It’s changing his way of appearance to the way others see him and others liking him only because he has a beer and not for who he really is. The commercial add is basically telling you, were the only beer who can give you popularity and attention. You will have hot girls by your side and rhythm to your dancing. People would like you if you choose us. BUY US!! BUY US!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lk2GK5V7KME
The commercial that I choose to use and watch is a Corona Commercial in Spanish with English words translating on what its saying. In this commercial ad it starts of by showing a man dancing in a club. There are a whole lot of people in their dancing with groups of people and there is one guy who is dancing alone who no one pays attention to. The DJ tells him what kind of dance is that, and begins telling him how he doesn’t have the rhythm to dance. The Corona commercial is not only trying to sell you of this special brand of beer but, looking at it closely is actually telling you more than what it’s written on the text. In the ad it shows many young people but, also an old lady. Its telling you that it doesn’t matter what age or type of person you are, Corona beer would make people want you. It also shows both gender of women and men with beer on their hand and having a good time. This video is not leaving out certain people in this ad, its showing connections. When you see the video it shows you, that you will have a good time no matter who you are and with whom, as long as there is a beer on your side you’ll be great. The commercial is changing how someone is by giving him beer and making him something that he’s not. It’s changing his way of appearance to the way others see him and others liking him only because he has a beer and not for who he really is. The commercial add is basically telling you, were the only beer who can give you popularity and attention. You will have hot girls by your side and rhythm to your dancing. People would like you if you choose us. BUY US!! BUY US!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lk2GK5V7KME
RR#5 Ford commercial
Scholes explains that a video text is usually a lot more than just a narrative strung across a series of frames and then glued together with plot devices. Video texts can be crafted to be instruments that tap into the underlying psyche of our cultural identity. This is accomplished by invoking myths and ideological paragons our environment has given us since childhood. Through the resurfacing of these images and ideas we unquestioningly adopted as children, video texts can quietly frame our sense of self within that construct of cultural narrative, establishing our identity by the reinforcement of cultural text. For the less critical, this can be accomplished within the matter of a 30-second advertisement, despite any gulf that exists between the childhood myth of our identity, and all the different realities we’ve been living since. Scholes is wary of this anti-critical philosophy because it can lead someone to trying to hold two inconsistent ideas. Furthermore, he is especially compelled to be critical because he feels that: “In this age of massive manipulation and disinformation, criticism is the only way we have of taking something seriously.” This is apparent in the fact that so many of today‘s liberal-minded youth pay more attention to satire news than regular news. We can see that with our environment and with the motives of those that fill it with its content, a critical approach is necessary. The transgenic power of video over our identity is used against us from every direction, in marketing and in propaganda. It is an art of peddling junk ideologies and commodities that has been honed to a science of psychological exploitation. So, lest we risk becoming as trivial as the worst parts of our culture, it is best be critical by unpacking the ideologies from the narratives and examining them closely for what we agree with.
In this commercial a soldier is returning home from a war, his mother and brother meet him at the airport and drive him home, but his father was unable to make it. On the way home there is a yellow ribbon tied to a clock in the middle of the city and another tied to a tree near their home. Upon arriving home, he meets his baby cousin for the first time. He then is staring at the picture of himself in his service uniform and the picture of his dad in his service uniform that is above it. He helps his mother with some dishes, she tells him that his father was running an errand and will be back soon, but he says with a tone of sarcasm that he wonders what he was going out for this time. His dad comes home in his older Ford Mustang. He begins retelling “war stories” to his son about how he remembered the day he got his Mustang, and how every guy from his squad coming back from the war wanted to get one. He mentions that when he was over in the war just the thought of his car kept his mind off things. The dad asks him if he wants to finally go for a ride, opening the garage to reveal a brand new red Mustang for his son.
The most important myth that this this commercial is trying to sell and reinforce is the tale of duty and patriotism our cultural narrative instills in us to honor. It is the story of the veteran coming home from war after nobly serving his country and returning to find himself struggling again to integrate back into old culture, finding old family wounds still healing, and meeting newborns for the first time. This narrative is trying to provoke the viewer into recognizing his role in the national heritage of patriotism, that is, as a non-soldier it is his duty to support the troops, or it is at least the most patriotic thing he can do bar becoming a solder himself. This is suggested by the little boy in the airport that salutes him, the little yellow ribbons he sees in the city and on a tree in the rural landscape. All of this reinforces the narrative that family values have been a story of American values, that our sense of nationalism is a foundation for the family unit, as is also suggested by his staring at the portraits of him and his dad in their uniforms on the wall. This is made more explicit by how his service helped mollify the disunity between him and his father through the association of Mustang with patriotism and service of country, which helps gap their differences and unites them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkNznIoboho&feature=related
In this commercial a soldier is returning home from a war, his mother and brother meet him at the airport and drive him home, but his father was unable to make it. On the way home there is a yellow ribbon tied to a clock in the middle of the city and another tied to a tree near their home. Upon arriving home, he meets his baby cousin for the first time. He then is staring at the picture of himself in his service uniform and the picture of his dad in his service uniform that is above it. He helps his mother with some dishes, she tells him that his father was running an errand and will be back soon, but he says with a tone of sarcasm that he wonders what he was going out for this time. His dad comes home in his older Ford Mustang. He begins retelling “war stories” to his son about how he remembered the day he got his Mustang, and how every guy from his squad coming back from the war wanted to get one. He mentions that when he was over in the war just the thought of his car kept his mind off things. The dad asks him if he wants to finally go for a ride, opening the garage to reveal a brand new red Mustang for his son.
The most important myth that this this commercial is trying to sell and reinforce is the tale of duty and patriotism our cultural narrative instills in us to honor. It is the story of the veteran coming home from war after nobly serving his country and returning to find himself struggling again to integrate back into old culture, finding old family wounds still healing, and meeting newborns for the first time. This narrative is trying to provoke the viewer into recognizing his role in the national heritage of patriotism, that is, as a non-soldier it is his duty to support the troops, or it is at least the most patriotic thing he can do bar becoming a solder himself. This is suggested by the little boy in the airport that salutes him, the little yellow ribbons he sees in the city and on a tree in the rural landscape. All of this reinforces the narrative that family values have been a story of American values, that our sense of nationalism is a foundation for the family unit, as is also suggested by his staring at the portraits of him and his dad in their uniforms on the wall. This is made more explicit by how his service helped mollify the disunity between him and his father through the association of Mustang with patriotism and service of country, which helps gap their differences and unites them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkNznIoboho&feature=related
Video Analysis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfxwXneCtEM&feature=related
In this Pepsi commercial that was made with music artists: Brittany Spears, Pink, Beyoncé Knowles, and Enrique Iglesias, everyone is dressed like romans to create a gladiator remake. Its starts out with Brittany, Beyoncé and Pink in their little cage-like starting gate where they are all in view with the king, played by Enrique Iglesias. They see him through a crack as he basks in his glory and reaches for a cold Pepsi. They get the beat going of the song “We will Rock you”, by Queen, by stomping their Roman weapons against their cage. When they go out to the middle of the ring the crowd has already caught on to the “stomp, stomp, clap”, and all three women meet in the middle and look at one another as they throw their weapons in a pile on the ground. The king puts on a confused look due to the fact that he was expecting them to battle, it’s then when the three of them turn around and its then when pink yells out “We will rock you!” and they all join in and start to sing. The entire time the king is looking around trying to find an answer to why the fight isn’t happening and why the crowd is so involved in the song and rhythm. The beat of the song that everyone was making causes the kings cooler full of Pepsi to move and fall off the edge and in result the king ends up flying off hos thrown and in to the ring along with the Pepsi. Pink, Brittany, and Beyoncé delightfully enjoy the cold beverage as the Enrique brushes himself off from his fall and at the same time realizes that there is an angry lion behind him.
Robert Scholes, the author of the essay, On reading a video text, talks about ideology and cultural reinforcement. When he writes about ideology he is talking about a type of belief system that can be anything. He relates this to Cultural reinforcement, which is anything that supports or strengthens ideas of cultural knowledge. There are some ideas and concepts that are native to certain cultures and just by living in that culture you become in tune with it; even if it’s not something you are involved with. In this Pepsi commercial there isn’t one person who speaks, just the singing. I related a good portion of this video to women power, I got this impression because it was all women in the roles that men usually play, and instead of them doing what they were supposed to do they rebelled. “Buddy you're an old man poor man pleadin' with your eyes gonna make you some peace some day you got mud on your face you big disgrace somebody better put you back into your place” was the last verse in the song We will rock you, sang by Pink, I felt like this line was directed straight to the king; they were letting him know that he can’t mess with them and that they are strong women. The roman time period setting also helped give this feel because women were used a great deal as a sex image back then, and around 2005-2006 the slogan for Pepsi was “An ice cold Pepsi. It’s better than sex!” It’s very common in America for there to be talk about strong women. To make sure that they aren’t taken advantage of as well as making it clear that woman and men can do the same things, women are just as strong. It’s also not unusual in our culture for there to be commercials with dinks related to some type of sport. It was a commercial that didn’t have a lot of words, but a strong visual and what I thought was a good message. When you don’t like something change it, and don’t let people walk all over you as you do so. There are times when you have to find a different approach to fighting back, just like how they sang instead of battling, it’s not easy, but when you do you can achieve much more.
In this Pepsi commercial that was made with music artists: Brittany Spears, Pink, Beyoncé Knowles, and Enrique Iglesias, everyone is dressed like romans to create a gladiator remake. Its starts out with Brittany, Beyoncé and Pink in their little cage-like starting gate where they are all in view with the king, played by Enrique Iglesias. They see him through a crack as he basks in his glory and reaches for a cold Pepsi. They get the beat going of the song “We will Rock you”, by Queen, by stomping their Roman weapons against their cage. When they go out to the middle of the ring the crowd has already caught on to the “stomp, stomp, clap”, and all three women meet in the middle and look at one another as they throw their weapons in a pile on the ground. The king puts on a confused look due to the fact that he was expecting them to battle, it’s then when the three of them turn around and its then when pink yells out “We will rock you!” and they all join in and start to sing. The entire time the king is looking around trying to find an answer to why the fight isn’t happening and why the crowd is so involved in the song and rhythm. The beat of the song that everyone was making causes the kings cooler full of Pepsi to move and fall off the edge and in result the king ends up flying off hos thrown and in to the ring along with the Pepsi. Pink, Brittany, and Beyoncé delightfully enjoy the cold beverage as the Enrique brushes himself off from his fall and at the same time realizes that there is an angry lion behind him.
Robert Scholes, the author of the essay, On reading a video text, talks about ideology and cultural reinforcement. When he writes about ideology he is talking about a type of belief system that can be anything. He relates this to Cultural reinforcement, which is anything that supports or strengthens ideas of cultural knowledge. There are some ideas and concepts that are native to certain cultures and just by living in that culture you become in tune with it; even if it’s not something you are involved with. In this Pepsi commercial there isn’t one person who speaks, just the singing. I related a good portion of this video to women power, I got this impression because it was all women in the roles that men usually play, and instead of them doing what they were supposed to do they rebelled. “Buddy you're an old man poor man pleadin' with your eyes gonna make you some peace some day you got mud on your face you big disgrace somebody better put you back into your place” was the last verse in the song We will rock you, sang by Pink, I felt like this line was directed straight to the king; they were letting him know that he can’t mess with them and that they are strong women. The roman time period setting also helped give this feel because women were used a great deal as a sex image back then, and around 2005-2006 the slogan for Pepsi was “An ice cold Pepsi. It’s better than sex!” It’s very common in America for there to be talk about strong women. To make sure that they aren’t taken advantage of as well as making it clear that woman and men can do the same things, women are just as strong. It’s also not unusual in our culture for there to be commercials with dinks related to some type of sport. It was a commercial that didn’t have a lot of words, but a strong visual and what I thought was a good message. When you don’t like something change it, and don’t let people walk all over you as you do so. There are times when you have to find a different approach to fighting back, just like how they sang instead of battling, it’s not easy, but when you do you can achieve much more.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Pepsi Refresh Anthem Super bowl ad XLIII
In this commercial they go back and forth the old generation of the 1970's to the 21 st century. The army people returning home and meeting with family members. They have skateboarders, an older skater to Tony Hawk. Bruce Lee, and a women fighter, Surfers, Peace signs, Shrek, Gumbie, People using candles to lighting lighters at a concert, Blues Brothers, School of rocks Jack black, and what looks like Wood stock. Their are a lot of cultural things and people in this commercial. They also have two people singing, Bob Dylan and Will.I.Am sing from the Black eye peas.
The message they are trying to say is that Pepsi is for every body.
The message they are trying to say is that Pepsi is for every body.
Reading Response #5
Part One
Recently after reading an article by Robert Scholes titled: “On Reading a Video Text” has inspired me to take a second look at the subliminal things happening in all sorts of video media that I have come across lately. Scholes gives a breakdown of all the things happening with our thought process during and after we have been exposed to video text. He uses a Budweiser commercial involving baseball, an African American Ump, the chance for success and the all American dream to show how as a society we can be shown snippets of a story and piece it together for ourselves making it have meaning and for some businesses thus making it an ideal marketing ploy.
Sholes states that “In processing a narrative text we actually construct the story, bringing a vast repertory of cultural knowledge to bear upon the text that we are contemplating.” Basically Scholes is saying that as we watch the commercial we fill in the bare bones outline of the story with our own meaning for it. We give the commercial a sense of importance to us by filling it with knowledge from our culture and things that make sense from society as we know it. And in making this comment Sholes is saying that we feel unified with what the commercial is saying by “getting the story” feeling as if we were participating in it instead of just viewing it therefore making it far more likely that in the future we may drink this beer, or buy this item, or use the services being offered to us through this video text.
Part Two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k52bxMjQnsoThis advertisement that I chose to use was a recent Super Bowl Ad for the company Best Buy and their buy it back program. Meaning that you buy a product from them and when it comes time to upgrade they buy back your old product at a lower price when you upgrade to a new one. This Ad was marketed using Ozzy Osbourne who is an aging burnt out singer from an older metal band named Black Sabbath and a newer pop singing sensation named Justin Bieber who is the newest “it” guy for all the teenagers and pre-teenagers.
It starts with Osbourne in a space type costume in what could be a spaceship type atmosphere holding up a cell phone saying something about the newest 4 G phone. Background voice chimes in to remind Osbourne that there is a newer version the new 5 G phone. Now poor Osbourne already looks confused and in steps Bieber who takes the phone from Osbourne who turns to leave the set. Camera pans on Bieber and cut is heard from offset where the camera pans back to Osbourne who is seen lingering in the background while shooting stops and we hear camera man state Ozzy is still on screen. He fully exits and boom close up to Bieber who holds up the phone and states it’s the newest 6 G phone. Camera pans on Osbourne and his wife looking confused where she asks “what’s a 6 G?” and he asks “what’s a Bieber?”
Now this ad is selling us on the newest technology and the idea that you don’t want to be out of date like Ozzy Osbourne. The marketers are counting on the cultural knowledge that we all know Ozzy Osbourne is a burn out. An ex metal singer who used to party hard and had a reality show with his family called “The Osboune’s” where anyone whom watched it saw that Osbourne was none to technology savvy or even remotely hip. So you had better rush out and upgrade that 4 G phone to the new 6 G so that you aren’t like him. Than to top it off they throw in your cultural knowledge of Justin Bieber who is coolness himself the complete opposite of Osbourne and presto instant upgrade people rushing out to get their new 6 G phone.
Recently after reading an article by Robert Scholes titled: “On Reading a Video Text” has inspired me to take a second look at the subliminal things happening in all sorts of video media that I have come across lately. Scholes gives a breakdown of all the things happening with our thought process during and after we have been exposed to video text. He uses a Budweiser commercial involving baseball, an African American Ump, the chance for success and the all American dream to show how as a society we can be shown snippets of a story and piece it together for ourselves making it have meaning and for some businesses thus making it an ideal marketing ploy.
Sholes states that “In processing a narrative text we actually construct the story, bringing a vast repertory of cultural knowledge to bear upon the text that we are contemplating.” Basically Scholes is saying that as we watch the commercial we fill in the bare bones outline of the story with our own meaning for it. We give the commercial a sense of importance to us by filling it with knowledge from our culture and things that make sense from society as we know it. And in making this comment Sholes is saying that we feel unified with what the commercial is saying by “getting the story” feeling as if we were participating in it instead of just viewing it therefore making it far more likely that in the future we may drink this beer, or buy this item, or use the services being offered to us through this video text.
Part Two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k52bxMjQnsoThis advertisement that I chose to use was a recent Super Bowl Ad for the company Best Buy and their buy it back program. Meaning that you buy a product from them and when it comes time to upgrade they buy back your old product at a lower price when you upgrade to a new one. This Ad was marketed using Ozzy Osbourne who is an aging burnt out singer from an older metal band named Black Sabbath and a newer pop singing sensation named Justin Bieber who is the newest “it” guy for all the teenagers and pre-teenagers.
It starts with Osbourne in a space type costume in what could be a spaceship type atmosphere holding up a cell phone saying something about the newest 4 G phone. Background voice chimes in to remind Osbourne that there is a newer version the new 5 G phone. Now poor Osbourne already looks confused and in steps Bieber who takes the phone from Osbourne who turns to leave the set. Camera pans on Bieber and cut is heard from offset where the camera pans back to Osbourne who is seen lingering in the background while shooting stops and we hear camera man state Ozzy is still on screen. He fully exits and boom close up to Bieber who holds up the phone and states it’s the newest 6 G phone. Camera pans on Osbourne and his wife looking confused where she asks “what’s a 6 G?” and he asks “what’s a Bieber?”
Now this ad is selling us on the newest technology and the idea that you don’t want to be out of date like Ozzy Osbourne. The marketers are counting on the cultural knowledge that we all know Ozzy Osbourne is a burn out. An ex metal singer who used to party hard and had a reality show with his family called “The Osboune’s” where anyone whom watched it saw that Osbourne was none to technology savvy or even remotely hip. So you had better rush out and upgrade that 4 G phone to the new 6 G so that you aren’t like him. Than to top it off they throw in your cultural knowledge of Justin Bieber who is coolness himself the complete opposite of Osbourne and presto instant upgrade people rushing out to get their new 6 G phone.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Reading Response #5
In his article “ On Reading a Video Text,” Robert Scholes comments on our societies lack of criticizing its own culture to try and bring about positive change. As he says during his article “what they (people) really lack, for the most part, is any way of analyzing and criticizing the power of a video text.” What he is trying to convey is that instead of continuing to idolize and not question our authority, we should instead criticize and point out flaws in our system so that we can work together to change them to form a more utopian society. What seems to be the main problem with this is that we have become so unaccustomed to doing so because of what Scholes calls “cultural reinforcement.” What he means by this is that we feel much more comfortable as part of a single entity and having a sense of belonging. Because of this, we trick ourselves in to believing that if we support a system, we should not disapprove of it in anyway.
I think the best way to try and explain Scholes complex claim is to do what he did and analyze a piece of media that uses tactics that can mislead people who don’t intellectually engage and question what is put in from of them. During the super bowl this year, a very perplexing commercial featuring Kim Kardashian came on. She was promoting the sketchers shape-ups shoes that work leg muscles in a way that normal shoes do not, to give you a better workout. The video shows her “breaking up” with her gorgeous fitness trainer and instead trying out the shape-ups. Then as the commercial ends, Kim turns to another “less attractive” man in the gym and says “nice shoes” because he is wearing shape-ups thus giving the man some encouragement to continue using them. The double meaning of leaving her trainer aside there are plenty of problems with this commercial. First off on a very obvious level, you cannot get in overall shape any better with these shoes than regular shoes. While they may tone your legs better they don’t give you an overall workout like a trainer would. However the much more deep narrative that is trying to be presented here is that working out and getting in shape will automatically make you look much more beautiful. This glorifying of working out is easily conveyed by the appearance of Ms. Kardashian. It gives the temporary illusion that working out is as beautiful and flawless as Kim Kardashian herself is. The commercial gives those who prize material looks over actual health of your body a lot more initiative than if some “ugly” woman were to be in shape. Of course the commercial is not just for women. When Kim complements the man at the end of the video on trying to get in shape, it reinforces that myth in our society that looks are far more important than intellect. Now for some (very sad) people this may be true, but for the most part there are much more complex things that create desire for another human being. What this video should be trying to do is show how you can create a healthier lifestyle for yourself by working out with the shape-ups and eating properly so that you can live longer. However this is not nearly as marketable as catering to the materialistic tendencies that people have.
Link to Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQWG__N9so0
I think the best way to try and explain Scholes complex claim is to do what he did and analyze a piece of media that uses tactics that can mislead people who don’t intellectually engage and question what is put in from of them. During the super bowl this year, a very perplexing commercial featuring Kim Kardashian came on. She was promoting the sketchers shape-ups shoes that work leg muscles in a way that normal shoes do not, to give you a better workout. The video shows her “breaking up” with her gorgeous fitness trainer and instead trying out the shape-ups. Then as the commercial ends, Kim turns to another “less attractive” man in the gym and says “nice shoes” because he is wearing shape-ups thus giving the man some encouragement to continue using them. The double meaning of leaving her trainer aside there are plenty of problems with this commercial. First off on a very obvious level, you cannot get in overall shape any better with these shoes than regular shoes. While they may tone your legs better they don’t give you an overall workout like a trainer would. However the much more deep narrative that is trying to be presented here is that working out and getting in shape will automatically make you look much more beautiful. This glorifying of working out is easily conveyed by the appearance of Ms. Kardashian. It gives the temporary illusion that working out is as beautiful and flawless as Kim Kardashian herself is. The commercial gives those who prize material looks over actual health of your body a lot more initiative than if some “ugly” woman were to be in shape. Of course the commercial is not just for women. When Kim complements the man at the end of the video on trying to get in shape, it reinforces that myth in our society that looks are far more important than intellect. Now for some (very sad) people this may be true, but for the most part there are much more complex things that create desire for another human being. What this video should be trying to do is show how you can create a healthier lifestyle for yourself by working out with the shape-ups and eating properly so that you can live longer. However this is not nearly as marketable as catering to the materialistic tendencies that people have.
Link to Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQWG__N9so0
Reading Response 4
In Sir Ken Robinsons video “How School kills Creativity” his main claim is that “creativity is as important in education as literacy.” In school today many teachers think that subjects like math, science, and writing are the most important things to have children learn. Sir Robinson believes that “if you are not prepared to be wrong then you will never come up with anything original” Sir Robinson believes that we are educating kids and not letting them think out of the box, so they become “educated out of their creative capacity.
In my experience I agree strongly with Sir Robinson, I came into elementary school in the fourth grade, from being previously homeschooled. I love to be creative, paint and draw and when I was homeschooled I was able to do that anytime I wanted, maybe even too much! When I went to elementary school many of the other classes were making art projects fairly often but my teacher basically never did that with us, which looking back was such a shame, at that age it’s so important to be able to show your creativity. At any age it’s important to be creative. Many times during teachers boring lectures I find my self doodling and drawing all over my notebook and by the end of class, there are more drawing then actual notes. It’s almost like my mind is bursting with creativity that needs to get out, but with busy classes and schedules I feel that people forget the importance of expressing yourself with creativity. The best artists that I have known are the students who get in trouble, struggle in subjects like math, science and English and skip class. Then when you see what they can do in art class, your amazed by the true talent they have, their minds may not be built for school subjects but I feel like the education systems find that hard to notice. On the other hand of course main subjects are important for success depending on the career choice a person chooses but bringing more creative opportunities give chances for some students to shine and show everyone what unique talent they have. In my opinion being good in school subjects doesn’t always make you smart.
In my experience I agree strongly with Sir Robinson, I came into elementary school in the fourth grade, from being previously homeschooled. I love to be creative, paint and draw and when I was homeschooled I was able to do that anytime I wanted, maybe even too much! When I went to elementary school many of the other classes were making art projects fairly often but my teacher basically never did that with us, which looking back was such a shame, at that age it’s so important to be able to show your creativity. At any age it’s important to be creative. Many times during teachers boring lectures I find my self doodling and drawing all over my notebook and by the end of class, there are more drawing then actual notes. It’s almost like my mind is bursting with creativity that needs to get out, but with busy classes and schedules I feel that people forget the importance of expressing yourself with creativity. The best artists that I have known are the students who get in trouble, struggle in subjects like math, science and English and skip class. Then when you see what they can do in art class, your amazed by the true talent they have, their minds may not be built for school subjects but I feel like the education systems find that hard to notice. On the other hand of course main subjects are important for success depending on the career choice a person chooses but bringing more creative opportunities give chances for some students to shine and show everyone what unique talent they have. In my opinion being good in school subjects doesn’t always make you smart.
Monday, February 14, 2011
Awakening spirits
In his video “Do schools kill creativity” Sir Ken Robinson emphasis on the extraordinary evidence of the human creativity and how it is oppressed by a rigid educative system. He firmly contends that creativity is as important in education as literacy and they should be treated with the same status. One of the reasons why he is making this big and potentially provocative claim is because schools have for a long-time-period been oppressed with the idea that certain subjects such as math and science are more important than other humanities subjects such as Arts and dance. I maintain his point as I have experienced the dogmatic structure of the whole educative system myself. In his lecture, he throws in a very interesting example of a little girl drawing a picture of god and the teachers said that nobody knows what god looks like and she answered they will in a minute. If I did this in school in Morocco, I would be expelled from school for it is a blasphemous act to picture god. Since middle school we have been taught how to think about things and how to see them not through the eye of our own human consciousness but through the eye of the system itself, which I think is totally destructive to the human creativity since it orients our minds to an enclosed frame work so that we can be in the box, think from within the box and conform to the economic and even cultural doctrines. This conforming goes far beyond education to reach the socioeconomic status of peoples. It is driven by the inhumane and oppressive conspiracy to conform the masses in order to keep them puppets of the system. They do so throughout threatening our minds with financial insecurity and the illusion of materialism. So it’s us, the people, facing the whole government structured institutions, from Wall Street to military and universities. I put it this way because it’s only when one reflects on it this way that one sees the immense gap that exists between the nature of the human spirit and the way the educative system functions. There is a considerable incoherence between our natural ways of learning and the mindset driving the educative system as a whole.
The famous artiste Picasso said once “All children are born artists; the problem is to remain an artist as we grow up”. Sir Robinson strongly acknowledges this quote and adds that we are educating people out of their creativitiy as we grow up in schools we grow out of creativity rather than in creativity for the essence of creativity is always tapped within the human mind. Later on, he states that every educative system on Earth has the same hierarchy of subjects placing mathematics and languages at the top followed by humanities and in the bottom of the pyramid is placed Art. And within arts there is a hierarchy placing arts and music in a higher state than drama and dance. Is there a rational reason for this unfairness distribution of subjects? Are people who are good in math smarter than artiste? I mean think about the difference between spending an hour dancing then an hour with a mathematical problem. If the goal of a human being is to be happy then what made you happier the first or the second hour? When we look at the output of education, Sir Robinson made a great statement asserting “The whole purpose of universities throughout the world is to produce university professors; they are the ones who come at the top” This concept that places university professors at the top of the human achievement is highly misguided because as Sir Robinson states, it is nothing but another form of life. So to look at the educative system from its historical occurrence, Robinson states that it came into being to meet the needs of industrialism. This is clearly evident as we see it in our everyday life. It is manifested on the fact that the most useful subjects for work are at the top. In order to bring justice to the human spirit, the educative system needs a radical change. We need a change that values the human intelligence and creativity rather than industrialism. We are in the midst of a worldwide human revolution and people cannot be judged or identified by their degree or social status. The human spirit is awakening to a new reality.
The famous artiste Picasso said once “All children are born artists; the problem is to remain an artist as we grow up”. Sir Robinson strongly acknowledges this quote and adds that we are educating people out of their creativitiy as we grow up in schools we grow out of creativity rather than in creativity for the essence of creativity is always tapped within the human mind. Later on, he states that every educative system on Earth has the same hierarchy of subjects placing mathematics and languages at the top followed by humanities and in the bottom of the pyramid is placed Art. And within arts there is a hierarchy placing arts and music in a higher state than drama and dance. Is there a rational reason for this unfairness distribution of subjects? Are people who are good in math smarter than artiste? I mean think about the difference between spending an hour dancing then an hour with a mathematical problem. If the goal of a human being is to be happy then what made you happier the first or the second hour? When we look at the output of education, Sir Robinson made a great statement asserting “The whole purpose of universities throughout the world is to produce university professors; they are the ones who come at the top” This concept that places university professors at the top of the human achievement is highly misguided because as Sir Robinson states, it is nothing but another form of life. So to look at the educative system from its historical occurrence, Robinson states that it came into being to meet the needs of industrialism. This is clearly evident as we see it in our everyday life. It is manifested on the fact that the most useful subjects for work are at the top. In order to bring justice to the human spirit, the educative system needs a radical change. We need a change that values the human intelligence and creativity rather than industrialism. We are in the midst of a worldwide human revolution and people cannot be judged or identified by their degree or social status. The human spirit is awakening to a new reality.
pitch, complaint, moment
the pitch: school systems have been designed to steifle creativity and make student more equal.
argues that we dont need school, but we still need education, that we're being forced into highschool
"first though we must wake up to what our schools really are: laboratories of experimentation on young minds, drill centers for the habits and attitudes that corporate society demands"
gatto wants us to manage ourselves.
Brittney, Kevin, Devin, Taylor
argues that we dont need school, but we still need education, that we're being forced into highschool
"first though we must wake up to what our schools really are: laboratories of experimentation on young minds, drill centers for the habits and attitudes that corporate society demands"
gatto wants us to manage ourselves.
Brittney, Kevin, Devin, Taylor
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Reading Response Numero 4.
In the video “How Schools Kill Creativity” starring Sir Ken Robinson he makes the claim that, “Creativity now, is as important as literacy and we should treat it with the same status.” His ideas are all centered round the thought that education is brain wiping kids. He believes, and I agree, that the education system is scaring people away from creativity. Learning is diverse in that, not one of us accomplishes it the same exact way as our colleagues. People learn through sound, sight, touch, conversation and even combinations of those and there is no way that learning systems are going to be able to reach every person’s educational needs when they are so focused on creating worker bees.
“Academic ability is dominating our view of intelligence because universities designed the system in their image… The consequence of this is many highly talented, brilliant, creative people think they are not because the only thing they were good at in school wasn’t valued or was actually stigmatized,” Robinson said. All around the world children are being taught for a job they will have later in life. Schools everywhere focus on subjects in this standard order: Math and language, Humanities, then the arts. But, why can’t the world teach dance to kids the same way it teaches math? All children are born with the tremendous ability to be creative and before they go to school they have the most brilliant imaginations and the potential to be great, not just academically. It’s like Picaso said, “All children are born an artist. The problem is to remain an artist.” When we tell kids that the creativity inside them is wrong then bring them up in a world where their sole purpose it to go to a school teaching them to serve the industry, we take away who they were created to be and make it nearly impossible to keep the creativity they were born with.
Education was created to lead us to industrial jobs but the world is in a revolution. It’s in a place where kids will possibly no longer have learning disabilities but have talents that pioneer a way for new jobs. Being wrong is not the same thing as being creative so people shouldn’t live in the mindset that just because their different they’re wrong. They are creative, they are new, they are now. So don’t fool yourselves into believing that if you are not good at math you will fail at life, find the gift put in you and soar with it. Don’t let education oppress your imagination.
“Academic ability is dominating our view of intelligence because universities designed the system in their image… The consequence of this is many highly talented, brilliant, creative people think they are not because the only thing they were good at in school wasn’t valued or was actually stigmatized,” Robinson said. All around the world children are being taught for a job they will have later in life. Schools everywhere focus on subjects in this standard order: Math and language, Humanities, then the arts. But, why can’t the world teach dance to kids the same way it teaches math? All children are born with the tremendous ability to be creative and before they go to school they have the most brilliant imaginations and the potential to be great, not just academically. It’s like Picaso said, “All children are born an artist. The problem is to remain an artist.” When we tell kids that the creativity inside them is wrong then bring them up in a world where their sole purpose it to go to a school teaching them to serve the industry, we take away who they were created to be and make it nearly impossible to keep the creativity they were born with.
Education was created to lead us to industrial jobs but the world is in a revolution. It’s in a place where kids will possibly no longer have learning disabilities but have talents that pioneer a way for new jobs. Being wrong is not the same thing as being creative so people shouldn’t live in the mindset that just because their different they’re wrong. They are creative, they are new, they are now. So don’t fool yourselves into believing that if you are not good at math you will fail at life, find the gift put in you and soar with it. Don’t let education oppress your imagination.
Reading Response 4
Sir Ken Robinson makes very interesting points in his workshop “How schools Kill Creativity”. He emphasizes how education in schools today have a primary focus for math, reading and writing and that classes that promote creativity like the arts, theater and dance are not as valued; because of this Robinson implies society is loosing its creativity. Robinson states “education is the same everywhere…we don’t teach dance like math”. After this declaration it really made me think about it why isn’t dance held to the same importance as math? Not that I myself am a great dancer but dancing is all about self expression, it is a great outlet for creativity why is this expression not important to society? Maybe I am not a math person but from personal experience, I have not felt great satisfaction from it, apart from coming to understand it when there is a test the following day. With math there is a right way and a wrong way, only one correct answer. With dancing there is no wrong way, an individual is free to explore, to play. Another interesting point Sir Robinson expressed was how young children perceive things. He explained how young kids are not afraid of being wrong and they take more chances because of this. As they grow schools are making mistakes unacceptable and kids loose their creativity for fear of being wrong. The same rule applies for in the work force, people are drilled so much of how they can do no wrong and in return do not even attempt to think outside the box for fear of rejection. I completely agree with this observation. A couple of years ago I tutored fifth graders at a local elementary school. They were always asking questions and attempting to figure out answers without any hesitation and it was almost refreshing to be surrounded by that type of behavior because at my level of schooling people were not that eager to see if they were wrong. After viewing Sir Robinsons workshop it really made me think there should be a reform on schooling systems. Schools are not looking for creativity or diversity but why not? When schools only focus on academics and not creativity it is literally developing only one part of our brain; schools, work and the government all push society to be their very best but when they do not value all components of each individual they are not reaching their full potential. Society will never be able to come up with anything new if we don’t have creativity. When schools focus primarily on math and literature though it may be great for kids who excel at those subjects what happens to the individuals who have other talents? In today’s society those kids will get advice from the schools saying that the things they enjoy like art or music, they will never be successful at. This is a very disturbing thought to me, I myself do not excel in average curriculum and nor am I deeply passionate about it so where will I fit into society? Where is the joy in life if an individual cannot do what they love?
Reading Response Four
In Sir Ken Robinson’s lecture School Kills Creativity he argues against the current public education system and how it stifles creativity. Sir Ken Robinson, creativity expert, states “national educations systems make mistakes the worst thing you can make which is educating people out of there creative capacities.” What Robinson is saying here is that school systems shun mistakes however mistakes aren’t bad as they can bring in creativity. Basically students are afraid to make a mistake so rather then being creative and sayings what on their mind they won’t say anything or they will give a picture perfect definition that is unoriginal. Slowly and slowly we lose this ability to be creative and spontaneous since we don’t use practice it during school, of course not everyone does lose this. Robinson also depicts the idea of the hierarchy of subjects in public schools. Robinson acknowledges “Every education system on earth has the same hierarchy of subjects, on the top is mathematics and the languages then the humanities then on the bottom is the arts. Then art and music is above drama and dance in the arts category.” Basically what Robinson is saying is that we strive most of our efforts on mathematics and the languages and almost forget about the other subjects as if they are unimportant. Robinson recognizes however that all the subjects are important and that dance is just as important as mathematics.
I agree with Robinson is that schools are stifling creativity because I can personally notice its effects first hand. Schools take us away from our wants and ability to be creative and opinionated in away. All schools have required classes and the classes you take the most of are science and languages, as seen in Robinson’s hierarchy. Kids are required to take such classes making it harder for them to take other classes or to experience different classes. Now I do think both math and English (in our case) is important as drawing on a resume won’t get you a job. However, I think it’s equally important that kids get exposed to as many subjects as possible so they can find themselves and find their skills. Giving the students choice allows them to be more creative and can also motivate the students to excel. I think lowering the requirements of these classes raises possibilities for students to become free and lets them be a bit more creative. Kids being forced to take these classes also lose motivation; I know I sure did in High School. If it’s a subject you’re not interested you can’t get motivated, end of story. The problem however would take a great deal of reform, students still need to learn basic skills as you don’t know what you want to be when you grow up. Students wanting to be doctors don’t need to know how to draw and students going into drama don’t need to know how dissect a frog, but when exactly does one figure out what they want to do?
I agree with Robinson is that schools are stifling creativity because I can personally notice its effects first hand. Schools take us away from our wants and ability to be creative and opinionated in away. All schools have required classes and the classes you take the most of are science and languages, as seen in Robinson’s hierarchy. Kids are required to take such classes making it harder for them to take other classes or to experience different classes. Now I do think both math and English (in our case) is important as drawing on a resume won’t get you a job. However, I think it’s equally important that kids get exposed to as many subjects as possible so they can find themselves and find their skills. Giving the students choice allows them to be more creative and can also motivate the students to excel. I think lowering the requirements of these classes raises possibilities for students to become free and lets them be a bit more creative. Kids being forced to take these classes also lose motivation; I know I sure did in High School. If it’s a subject you’re not interested you can’t get motivated, end of story. The problem however would take a great deal of reform, students still need to learn basic skills as you don’t know what you want to be when you grow up. Students wanting to be doctors don’t need to know how to draw and students going into drama don’t need to know how dissect a frog, but when exactly does one figure out what they want to do?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)