Influences

Hi, my name is Mimi and I am a celebrity magazine junkie. (This is when the group would say "Hi Mimi" and then we would all sit down making a unified circle)


That was three years ago. I was insanely addicted to all the racy-gossip-laden magazines that told about every celebrity hook-up to their even more intriguing public break-ups. I found myself genuinely interested in their relationships, what their next career step would be, what they were wearing, etc. I wanted to shop at the same places. I wanted to wear the same clothes/designers. I wanted to “look” like them, or at least the ones I admired.

I surrounded myself with tons of celebrity magazines because I had a genuine fascination for celebrities and their lifestyles. I preferred to get my “celeb fix” from US magazine. It had all the nice glossy pictures and provided me with steamy stories. I knew such trivial information as to Britney Spears’ diet from what breed type Christina Aguilera’s mutts were.

One day, after flipping through one of my magazines, I noticed that I was starting to compare myself to the celebrities seen in them. I would say “I wanted her legs, her bottom, her arm definition, her…” and the list went on. Once this transpired and I acknowledged it, I viewed all those celebrity magazines that I favored so much in a different light. They no longer just provided me with fun entertainment but rather had an impact on my self esteem and my self image. Living in a society where anyone with some sort of celebrity status equates to god-like adoration makes it easy for impressionable youth to look up to the wrong individuals for the wrong reasons. Take the incredibly surprising large fan base of Paris Hilton for example. Can someone explain to me why little girls are trying to look and act like Miss Paris who coined the obnoxious phrase "that's HOT"?

The moral of the story is not that celebrity magazines are the “devil” or that they only produce negative impacts on their audiences. The point is that magazines, just like any other form of media, have a strong hold in our society and influences us immensely. What I learned, and hopefully other girls already know, is that celebrities, the ones filling up the pages of US or People or Vogue, are not the ones to look up to. The real heroes that should be admired are the strong, intelligent, “stand up for what they believe in” folks who make an impact in our society in a positive manner. They are the ones to follow and mimic, not people who are just on the TV.

(Side note: There are exceptions, such as those celebrities like Oprah and Angelina Jolie who dedicate themselves in partaking in philanthropic acts and sees a bigger and better picture for the world.)

Print Version V. Web Version

To my surprise, the print version of the San Jose Mercury News article "Age, time can't erase her past as a Nazi guard" and the web version has less differences than I expected.

The article is about an 84-year-old woman named Elfriede Lina Rinkel being deported out of the U.S. because of a recent unveiling of a life-long secret. It seems that Rinkel, widow of a German Jew and a known contributor to numerous Jewish charities, was a former Nazi guard at the Ravensbruck concentration camp in Germany from 1944 to 1945. Although decades have passed with Rinkel living a peaceful life and being of no harm to anyone, law requires her to be tried in court and deported for her participation in Nazi atrocities. Rinkel, at the budding age of 18, opted to be a Nazi guard in the all women's concentration camp because it paid better than working in the factories. She also attests to never harming any prisoners during her year long employment. But, "is there a point when the horrors of the past can be forgiven?" asks the article's writers.

Reading both the print version and the web version allowed me to see that the structure and the actual article itself did not change, even if being disseminated through different formats. The article was exactly the same with the same content and sources. This surprised me because web versions of a news coverage is usually always shorter and condensed than its counterpart print versions.

However, I did run into some differences. For example, the newspaper provided a picture of Rinkel while there was no picture to be found of her in the web version. There were advertisments and links surrounding the web version while the print version did not have any accompanying it at all (at least none on the same page). Both had contact information available and provided links that would allow the audience to parttake in a discussion and vote but only the web version had a live link. (side note: 343 votes were made to answer the question if forgiveness can be made for someone's past atrocities; 66% voted "yes" and the other 34% voted "no")

For this particular article there weren't many relevant differences. The only real difference was its format and how it was being published. With that said and concluded, how would you vote? Would you be able to forgive someone for their past atrocities?

Fifteen Minutes with Michael Savage

It's astonishing to me what media personalities are able to get away with these days. These controversial, conspiracy-spewing, anything-for-higher-ratings-personalities might be taking their search for over the top ratings a little too far.

After thinking the infamous Howard Stern was something to be reckoned with in regards to controversy, I had a chance to listen to Michael Savage. The name "Savage" perfectly describes his radio show. It took me less than fifteen minutes of listening to him squaller and offend to conclude him to be an arrogant, pretentious individual who does not have any qualms about being viewed as pollitically incorrect.

He titles himself as a fortune teller who is able to accurately forecast the future. Constantly boasts about his intellect and intuition and attests that anyone who listens long enough to his radio show will come to realize that he is their bestfriend, saying that he is the only thing between us and reality, that he can save us, and that he can tell the future.

In a past news coverage about the recent bay area hit-and-run tragedy, Savage gives credit to the perpetrator saying that he at least targeted a "rainbow coalition", referring to the perp's different ethnic victims. He also mentions that the perp, Middle Eastern in descent, understandably came to the U.S. because the women from where he originates are so ugly that they need to wear veils to cover their faces. In another infamous incident, Savage tells off a homosexual caller by saying that he hopes he gets AIDS and dies. I doubt any of these words or phrases would ever come out of the mouth of opposite, straight-laced radio personality 810 KGO's Ron Owens.

Savage, although crude and gruff, absolutely knows what he is doing and he is doing it well. He's become so popular through his controversial spews that he's been able to publish and sell four books: The Savage Nation, The Enemy Within, Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, and The Political Zoo. Needless to say, although he may not be the perfect role model, Savage is getting what he wants--PAID!

The Book Crossing Club

This is just a brief entry for all those book lovers like me. Rest assured paperbacks are still alive and kicking and will give those evil ebooks a run for their money!

Sometime last week, while getting some coffee in the breakroom of my company, to my pleasant surprise I came across an unclaimed book. I picked it up and read on the front that it is a BookCrossing book. When opening the book to the first page I found the message:

Howdy! Hola! Bonjour! Guten Tag!

I'm a very special book. You see, I'm traveling around the world making new friends. I hope I've met another friend in you. Please go to www.BookCrossing.com and enter my BCID number. You'll discover where I've been and who has read me, and can let them know I'm safe here in your hands. Then...READ and RELEASE me!

I think this idea is the niftiest thing and I just wanted to share. The book I found is Mr. Maybe by Jane Green. I've never heard of her but I'll crack the book open and give it a try.

Propaganda

Throughout my years as a media consumer I never really paid that much attention to the notion of propaganda. I was familiar with the concept but never thoroughly got the fact that experiencing propaganda is a daily occurance. Now I realize that I wake up to it, have my morning coffee with it, and fall alseep to it. I encounter propaganda everyday of my life and realizing this is a little daunting. Propaganda is scary because it never provides unbiased information for the audience to interpret and to decide on their own but rather aims to influence a person's ideas and actions by providing already made decisions.

The sole purpose for propaganda is to influence someone's beliefs and behavior with biased information. It is a systematic way of manipulation.

Take our whole war on terrorism. (I know we're all tired of this topic, but bare with me) Day in and day out our government is shoving down our throats propaganda that aims to center and support their ideas and actions. All of GWB's religious garble (my apologies for those "righteous" individuals who believe that state and religion should go hand in hand, but I vehemently disagree) to urgent talks about weapons of mass destruction have blantant propaganda tones written all over them. Of course this isn't any new news. Any educated person is well aware that every government tries to control their citizens by overloading their days with ongoing propaganda.

The government isn't the only player in the propaganda game however. Click on www.loosechange911.com to view arguments against GWB's claims of the tragic events on 9/11.

What makes propaganda so scary is that it is a one-sided promotion. Propaganda never provides the opposing side and it is very efficient and easy to fall in to. Which leads me to conclude that no matter what the ends, whether it be justified by the means or not, theoretically propaganda is not good. How propaganda functions, hyping one side of the story and never providing the other, makes finding truth more difficult.

Are Books Becoming Extinct?

Are books the dinosaurs of the publishing world?

Although it seems to be going that way, I don't think books will become extinct anytime soon. Many predict that books will be obsolete because of the innovation and introduction of the internet. Since the internet, cd sales, dvd sales, newpaper and magazine subscriptions have been dwindling. Now a days, everyone is hooked up to the internet and getting their media that way.

However, books have a different feel to them. They're very much romantic in a sense. Imagine having to load up and cuddle to your computer or laptop to read a good romance novel or mystery book. That wouldn't be much fun. The convenience of a small paperback novel is something that current laptops can't provide. Books, hardcover or paperback, are going to be those classic things that you won't be able to give up. You don't have to worry about running out of battery before getting to that next exciting page that you want to read.

Some may reason that instead of carrying around numerous books that all together weigh more than one wants to carry, they would rather utilize a laptop that has everything from classic stories to the latest breaking news stories right at their finger tips. But what if a virus, glitch in the system, or a simple issue of running out of battery occurs? What then? These are issues that books will never give you. Books = RELIANCE, and that's a quality everyone can appreciate.

Record Companies are a Must

If there were no record companies, there would only be a handful of successful musical artists/bands. Record companies have numerous facets and departments in which assist in the success of a musician. They provide their potential record-selling artists with steps to develop themselves personally as an artist. They create the marketing plan for the album, delve in promotions for the album and generally take care of bookkeeping and overall finances for the album's production.

In a purely hypothetical situation, if I were in a band and there was no such thing as a record company, I would have an extremely hard time getting started. Usually record companies pay for a whole album's production while giving the artist an advance to live off of while making the cd/album. Thus, no record companies would mean, every bit of cost in producing my music would ultimately be from my own pocket or from an colossal loan of some sort.

Another hard obstacle would be the promotions part of my album. Usually record companies have a diligent department with the sole purpose of promoting and marketing their artists and albums. At this day in age, an unknown artist can't even get a radio station to play their music unless they're signed with a reputable recording label, which means that I would have to do a lot of a**-kissing to get my music on the air.

Without a record company to help me, I would have to play my music where ever and whenever
I can get an audience, that means in restaurants, karaoke bars, public streets, etc. I would have to play anywhere and as much as possible to get word out of my music. In addition to that, I would have to promote and do my own selling, and that means after my gigs, I'd have to sell my own cds. Inevitably, with tremendous perseverance and some financial debt, I'd be a mega-super-star in the rhelm of main stream music by my 40's-50's. WHOO-HOO!

Recording companies are needed for the high-level production and distribution of music, with that said, I'm now thinking twice about the whole piracy and illegal downloading issue.

Reality Shows Dwindling

The hype of reality shows are dwindling. Their 15 minutes of fame seem to be coming to a slow but sure halt; and knowing this, presents pressure to venture into the next step: create CONTROVERSY.

The once immensely popular reality show, Survivor, has come to a new low. Aware that the number of their viewers are shrinking, they're bringing controversial TV into a new arena, one that pins race against race. Survivor: Cook Islands, debuting Sept. 14 on CBS, will consist of 4 opposing teams segregated by their racial backgrounds. Whites, Blacks, Asians and Hispanics will be competing in the show's usual games emphasizing physical endurance, mental capabilities and personal drive.

But what will this entail? Already this has stirred up talk around the water cooler about who will win which contest with underlying stereotypical misconceptions. "Whites and Asians are likely to win the games that require more intellect since they're more nerdy, while Blacks and Hispanics will surely win the games that require great physical fitness since they're more physically built."

My guess is that this season's Survivor, already jammed packed with controversy days before it's debut, will be a hit. Hopefully though, it will bring more social acceptance and understanding than social ignorance and hate when one team or race becomes victorious above all the others.

My Sentiments Exactly!

The RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) has been a continuing opponent against illegal P2P file sharing for years, claiming it to be piracy, an illegal action. The RIAA, consisting of numerous private enterprises from recording labels to distribution corporations, was a huge contributor to the end of Shawn Fanning's original version of Napster, the once incredibly popular P2P file sharing site. After the take-down of Fanning's original version of Napster, the RIAA acknowledged a new dilemma, individual consumers. How are they going to stop individual consumers from illegal file sharing?

Andrew Balingit made a good point in his August 31st blog entry entitled "RIAA and students: not exactly the perfect bedfellows". The RIAA has been trying to chip away at the controversial file sharing issue, throwing away large portions of money for mass promotions and advertisments in efforts to prevent individuals from illegal file sharing. These promotions, mainly focusing on young adolescents and college students, are seen to have made no real effect and are considered to be silly and nonthreatening. Balingit makes an example of a newly made short film produced by the RIAA which emphasizes the danger of piracy, saying that it's "just one more thing for students not to pay attention to." My sentiments exactly.

When discussing this issue of illegal file sharing with a couple of peers, I came across an interesting notion. A friend of mine reasoned that it is really easy to miss the unethical aspect of illegal file sharing because when you do "steal", as what piracy really is, there is usually a tangible object that you're stealing. But with piracy or illegal file sharing, there isn't. So that notion of stealing can easily escape us. One can easily argue the same for plagiarism, but it's still an interesting point I wanted to contribute.

RIAA's execs need to pursue another route because their constant ads and promotions aren't working. For supposedly reputable top level execs, they don't learn and adapt to the times that quickly do they?