The debate between USA’s The 4400 and NBC’s Heroes is a perfect example of topics brought up in Richards Butch’s reading this week. His article discussed the how television content is affected by advertising pressure, production costs, and risk factors in producing shows. Many times when watching television we are bombarded by the same type of shows. Television networks constantly face the difficulty of veering away from the norm and producing something completely different. In Butsch’s article, he states that “to avoid risk, network executives have chosen programs that repeat the same images of class decade after decade” (2003), but how far does this repetition extend. In 2004, the USA network created a television show called The 4400. This show was a sci-fi show like no other. To understand what this show is about watch this video.
Some of you familiar with Heroes may have notice similarities between this show and Heroes. Two years after the premiere of The 4400, NBC released its own version called Heroes. While a fan of both shows myself, I can’t help but discredit Heroes because of its stolen ideas. The 4400 started with people having special abilities and were on a quest to find out where they came from and how they could use their gifts for the greater good. As the show when on, one character was able to manufacture promison, which was a shot used to give people abilities. Soon after this plot developed, characters in Heroes also discovered a way to give abilities to everyone. While having two good shows on air should be every fan’s wish, the problem that arose was the cancellation of The 4400. NBC’s wider audience and appeal made its show more successful, despite the fact that they borrowed ideas from the USA’s executives.
In my opinion, The 4400 involved more skilled actors, better story lines, more mystery, and much less confusing time travel. NBC piggy-backed on the success of The 4400 in order to attract its audience and eventually run The 4400 off the air. For further reading on this controversy over Heroes exploitation of The 4400 read this article: http://www.giftsandfreeadvice.com/free_advice/nbc-heroes-rips-off-the-4400-too-much/
Works cited:
Butsch, R. (2003). Ralph, Fred, Archie, and Homer: Why Television Keeps Re-creating the White Male Working-Class Buffoon. In Gail Dines & Jean M. Humez (Eds.), Gender, Race, and Class inMmedia (pp. 403-412). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
By Laura Vandenberg
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Communication and Advertising.
Advertising has been around for a long time. Advertising is a form of mass communication. Advertisements deliver its messages to millions of people at once, whether they are on billboards, in magazines, or on television- they are everywhere. The goal of an advertisement is for companies to promote their products in such a way that will catch the consumers eye, and make them want to by it.
Over the past decade, companies, especially clothing companies, have discovered the effect that sex appeal has on its audience. Sex is a number one selling point, and it is used to lure a persons eye onto an advertisement. For example advertisements for Abercrombie and Fitch use naked models to sell their clothes. Sometimes the clothes aren't even evident in these advertisements, however they real in consumers, and their company is skyrocketing. Commercial advertisements for People's jewelry are generally sexual as well.
The sexual advertisements that are seen today would NOT have been socially acceptable in the generation of our grandparents and even our parents generation. Companies aren't just selling their product to their customers, they are also selling sex. The majority of these audiences are youth and young adults which causes even more of a problem. People wonder why kids are having sex at such a young age, but how can they help it when it is all around them? Its shoved in their face from television commercials, to movies, to magazine ads and so on. When did sex appeal become socially acceptable to use in advertisements? How do you feel about this??
By: Krystal Knopf
Over the past decade, companies, especially clothing companies, have discovered the effect that sex appeal has on its audience. Sex is a number one selling point, and it is used to lure a persons eye onto an advertisement. For example advertisements for Abercrombie and Fitch use naked models to sell their clothes. Sometimes the clothes aren't even evident in these advertisements, however they real in consumers, and their company is skyrocketing. Commercial advertisements for People's jewelry are generally sexual as well.
The sexual advertisements that are seen today would NOT have been socially acceptable in the generation of our grandparents and even our parents generation. Companies aren't just selling their product to their customers, they are also selling sex. The majority of these audiences are youth and young adults which causes even more of a problem. People wonder why kids are having sex at such a young age, but how can they help it when it is all around them? Its shoved in their face from television commercials, to movies, to magazine ads and so on. When did sex appeal become socially acceptable to use in advertisements? How do you feel about this??
By: Krystal Knopf
Christian Hegemony - a personal experience
Christian hegemony in Kenya
Hegemony is a sensitive subject to discuss especially if it is discussed among the elites in society. This is because the elites are usually on the wayward side of the effects of hegemony; they reap the benefits of hegemony and it is in their best interest to retain the status quo. Cultural hegemony is achieved through the subordination of other cultures to a dominant culture. The net effect is the manipulation of the thought processes of entire societies. In the event that the world decides to adopt a global culture, this dominant culture would seem an obvious choice.
To demonstrate how a dominant culture manipulates other cultures, I have chosen to discuss Christianity and its hegemonic treatment of Kenya’s traditional religious beliefs. This is not a research paper; it is an account of some of my personal experiences as a young Christian boy growing up in a Christian family and attending a church-sponsored school.
My first Christian lesson was about Jesus Christ, His father, God and their arch enemy, Satan. I learned that Jesus was a Jew, and I also learned about the history and tribulations of Jews from their original land to Egypt, and their final settlement in Canaan. I remember seeing a few pictures of Jesus in little booklets and for sure, He bore the physical features of a Jew. One would be forgiven if he or she mistook Him for an Arab.
Christianity was not brought to Kenya by the Jews but by Europeans from England. Beside the altar of my small church in Kenya were two pictures; One of Jesus Christ and the other of Satan. Jesus was a handsome blue-eyed Caucasian man and Satan was an ugly black man with 2 horns on his head. Every time I looked at this picture, I silently “knew” that I was a little devil and with time, I would grow into a big one.
At school, the studies carried embedded messages that seemed harmless at the time. There were lots of graphic content with beautiful pictures of England and the London Bridge. We knew that there was a better quality of life in England and that could only be achieved by doing well in the English language. We learned the English history and geography before we learnt our own, and we felt very proud about it. We learned how to write and speak English but not our own languages. I am not complaining, just explaining.
I celebrated Christmas with my family every December 25th in the full belief that it was the birthday of Jesus Christ. I had never associated Santa Klaus with Christ’s birthday. My first impression of Santa Klaus is another story; He had to be a very generous white male and no other culture could be trusted with that role. I am not accusing, just explaining.
Today, I look back at some of the teachings and experiences and wonder what the real effects are. I know for sure that I am not a product of negotiated hegemony; I am a product of dominant hegemony. I am also not a product of counter hegemony because my brainwashing did not allow me to view positively anyone who tried to derail my journey into the dominant culture. Now I am a member of the elite class and I can confess here that I am not very keen to oppose embedded things because I am on the greener side of the field. Was this probably the desired effect?
Victor Karanja
Hegemony is a sensitive subject to discuss especially if it is discussed among the elites in society. This is because the elites are usually on the wayward side of the effects of hegemony; they reap the benefits of hegemony and it is in their best interest to retain the status quo. Cultural hegemony is achieved through the subordination of other cultures to a dominant culture. The net effect is the manipulation of the thought processes of entire societies. In the event that the world decides to adopt a global culture, this dominant culture would seem an obvious choice.
To demonstrate how a dominant culture manipulates other cultures, I have chosen to discuss Christianity and its hegemonic treatment of Kenya’s traditional religious beliefs. This is not a research paper; it is an account of some of my personal experiences as a young Christian boy growing up in a Christian family and attending a church-sponsored school.
My first Christian lesson was about Jesus Christ, His father, God and their arch enemy, Satan. I learned that Jesus was a Jew, and I also learned about the history and tribulations of Jews from their original land to Egypt, and their final settlement in Canaan. I remember seeing a few pictures of Jesus in little booklets and for sure, He bore the physical features of a Jew. One would be forgiven if he or she mistook Him for an Arab.
Christianity was not brought to Kenya by the Jews but by Europeans from England. Beside the altar of my small church in Kenya were two pictures; One of Jesus Christ and the other of Satan. Jesus was a handsome blue-eyed Caucasian man and Satan was an ugly black man with 2 horns on his head. Every time I looked at this picture, I silently “knew” that I was a little devil and with time, I would grow into a big one.
At school, the studies carried embedded messages that seemed harmless at the time. There were lots of graphic content with beautiful pictures of England and the London Bridge. We knew that there was a better quality of life in England and that could only be achieved by doing well in the English language. We learned the English history and geography before we learnt our own, and we felt very proud about it. We learned how to write and speak English but not our own languages. I am not complaining, just explaining.
I celebrated Christmas with my family every December 25th in the full belief that it was the birthday of Jesus Christ. I had never associated Santa Klaus with Christ’s birthday. My first impression of Santa Klaus is another story; He had to be a very generous white male and no other culture could be trusted with that role. I am not accusing, just explaining.
Today, I look back at some of the teachings and experiences and wonder what the real effects are. I know for sure that I am not a product of negotiated hegemony; I am a product of dominant hegemony. I am also not a product of counter hegemony because my brainwashing did not allow me to view positively anyone who tried to derail my journey into the dominant culture. Now I am a member of the elite class and I can confess here that I am not very keen to oppose embedded things because I am on the greener side of the field. Was this probably the desired effect?
Victor Karanja
Monday, November 9, 2009
The Evolution of the Cell Phone
The cell phone in 'mind, body and soul' so to speak, has advanced enormously over the past two decades.
By mind I mean the intelligence of the phone itself and its functional capabilities.
By body I am referring to the physical design and appearance of cell phones.
And by soul I mean the general purpose and usage of cellular devices.
When the idea of cell phones originated, the purpose for their use included and was essentially restricted to voice calling. There was no texting ability or even a thought of a built in camera.
Can you imagine?
This example seems prehistoric to people of our generation. There were various models of cellular phones beginning from this size and evolving quickly into smaller, hand held devices.
One of the first cell
phones in this series that many people may recognize is the Motorola MicroTAC. The phone became overwhelmingly popular due to its light weight and small size (for the time). It was the first flip phone and the first phone to fit into the pocket. This enhanced the usage of cell phones and the communication involved. With a phone in your pocket all day long, one can be reached at any time and any place.
With such potential, it is no wonder that the cell phone has become as advanced as it is today. The phone that became popular shortly after this one included a new, smaller, Motorola known as the StarTAC. This came about in 1996 and again advanced the way users viewed the cellular phone.
The next great advance in the world of cell phones was the Nokia. The Nokia8810 came out in 1998 and changed the design of the cell phone completely. It included a flat antenna that hid inside the phone so that it would be more aesthetically pleasing. The design of N
okia phones has not changed dramatically; in that it still generally maintains its small rectangular shape with the "candy bar" feel to it. However, those phones are now often referred to as "bricks" rather than "candy bars". Our expectations for the devices have advanced so greatly that these phones which were once known as slick new designs are now very old and outdated. Although Nokia remains as one of the most reliable phone companies, maintaining strong and dependable products, they no longer make the most attractive or technologically advanced phones and are therefore found to be much less popular.
Despite the fact that companies such as Nokia make such trustworthy products, new and different phones have become much more popular largely because of their appearance. For example, the Motorola Razr was a wildly popular cell phone when it was released. Its sharp new appearance and variety of offered colours were among the attractions this phone had to offer. However, when it came down to it, the phone was highly unreliable and Motorola faced many challenges with this product. Similarly, the LG Chocolate caused various problems for the LG company and gave them an awful reputation as cell phone providers.
Not only has the physical appearance of the cell phone been updated throughout the years, but so has the use of the phone and the applications a cell phone has to offer. From phone calls to voice mail, to caller ID and call waiting the actual phone options are very useful and have advanced greatly.
However, it is the other technologies now involved in the usage of cell phones that have become so very far advanced. These include but are not limited to text messaging, picture messaging, cameras, music, games and internet access.
Cell phones are remodeled and re released so often now that it seems one day you may h
ave the newest technology, but the next it is garbage. In terms of cellular devices, it seems as if it is constantly "out with the old, on with the new." For example: the BlackBerry. When BlackBerry brand first came out, it was basically intended to be a two way pager. However, between then and now, it has rapidly become one of the largest growing technologies both in function and popularity. It has become a mini computer, cell phone, email centre, digital camera, music player and much more to its users. When the BlackBerry first began it was mainly used by business people or others who had a use for its many functions (mainly the email and internet). Now, the BlackBerry has taken over the use of regular cell phones for many people who have no use for most of the functions it offers.
It has recently become overwhelmingly popular for its BBM (BlackBerry Messenger) application. This is similar to an instant messaging program such as MSN Messenger. This along with the use of text messaging has changed the way the world communicates. With the opportunity at our fingertips 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, communicating between one another for work purposes, leisure, or any other reason has increased and become possible anytime, anywhere. The use of the BlackBerry has even been noted as addictive. This is how the term "CrackBerry" came about. This nickname suggests that once one starts to use a BlackBerry they just cannot stop.
The iPhone is another example of the newest models of cellular devices. It is another complex version of the cell phone which has become extremely popular since its release. Despite the known problems and disfunctions with these complicated pieces of technology, people are continuing to buy into the idea of such intricate communication devices.
The use of cell phones has had an enormous impact on how people communicate in almost all settings. This includes the workplace, the classroom (school), for teams, clubs and simple general conversation. Text messaging has become a colossal form of communication which wouldn’t have been possible without the evolution of the cell phone.
Cell phones have been proven to be very useful devices in emergency situations among many others. However, is it really necessary (or healthy for that matter) for people to depend so largely on one small piece of technology in their daily lives?
Can you live without yours?
Would you?
By: Nikole Davies
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)