This week marks the end of the semester for all of my classes except for one. This will feel like the longest week of my life.
Anyways, back to COMM 101. Reviewing each of the articles covered in class this week gave us all a chance to revisit and rethink some of the topics covered in the second half of the semester. With the combination of this and a lecture in COMM 102 this week, I've been able to think more about the existence of social media on the internet today. Looking at websites like those mentioned by Sharon Meraz, such as Digg, we see just one style of social media out of the thousands and thousands that exist online.
It will be very interesting to see where social media takes us in the future. I begin to think about whether or not people will eventually lose hope on big time news companies and realize that people can make their own news through the use of blogs and sites like Digg.
Also, I sit around and wonder if the world as we know it will change so dramatically that face-to-face communication becomes far more rare than it is today and we rely more on internet communication.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Sunday, April 19, 2009
All about Katrina
So this week's guest lecturers brought with them some rather intense conversations. Every now and then you hear about how New Orleans is still recovering, but you don't hear about it with the intensity that the New Orleans area deserves.
It's interesting to see the framing the news stations did after the storm hit. I'm slightly on the fence with a lot of the statements that were made in the lecture though. On one hand, it's highly unfortunate that so many stereotypes were reinforced by the images that were shown. But, on the other hand, are news stations not supposed to show certain footage because it might reinforce negative stereotypes? But BACK to the other side, do the negative images really have to be shown when the reporters are talking about things totally unrelated to what we're seeing?
Either way though, it is highly evident that there are people in Louisiana that need help. I have no idea what I want to do as far as a career goes after I graduate, so I have already thought about doing something along the lines of AmeriCorps. This is just making me want to join some sort of organization to help people in need even more.
It's interesting to see the framing the news stations did after the storm hit. I'm slightly on the fence with a lot of the statements that were made in the lecture though. On one hand, it's highly unfortunate that so many stereotypes were reinforced by the images that were shown. But, on the other hand, are news stations not supposed to show certain footage because it might reinforce negative stereotypes? But BACK to the other side, do the negative images really have to be shown when the reporters are talking about things totally unrelated to what we're seeing?
Either way though, it is highly evident that there are people in Louisiana that need help. I have no idea what I want to do as far as a career goes after I graduate, so I have already thought about doing something along the lines of AmeriCorps. This is just making me want to join some sort of organization to help people in need even more.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Everyblock
I found the guest speaker's presentation this week very interesting. I've actually used the chicagocrime.org web site before to check out the crime in the neighborhood I used to live in. It was a very useful tool, even though the results I found were less than desirable (luckily I moved out of that neighborhood).
The evolution from that site into everyblock.com is very interesting, to say the least. I've subscribed via the RSS feeds and have been keeping up with what's going on in my neighborhood every day since that class. Just today, using everyblock.com, I found out that 2 Hispanic males pulled a gun on a 58 year old woman driving her car and shot out her windows at 8am. Unfortunately they got away, but without this site I probably wouldn't have even known about it. What scares me even more than the fact that it was 3 blocks from my apartment is the fact that it happened 1 block from my girlfriend's apartment. I feel like a parent with as much as I worry about her safety living here.
The evolution from that site into everyblock.com is very interesting, to say the least. I've subscribed via the RSS feeds and have been keeping up with what's going on in my neighborhood every day since that class. Just today, using everyblock.com, I found out that 2 Hispanic males pulled a gun on a 58 year old woman driving her car and shot out her windows at 8am. Unfortunately they got away, but without this site I probably wouldn't have even known about it. What scares me even more than the fact that it was 3 blocks from my apartment is the fact that it happened 1 block from my girlfriend's apartment. I feel like a parent with as much as I worry about her safety living here.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Regarding outsourcing in the film industry.
This week's guest speaker brought a lot of interesting things to think about to the table, at least for me. I felt as though I could have had a conversation about many of the things she spoke of at far greater lengths than the class time allowed.
For instance, when it comes to a film being Canadian vs. being American, there are so many shades of gray that it nearly makes it impossible to have a right or wrong answer. I think one way to look at it is to remember that even big-budget, feature films are still works of art. These works of art are done by many people, who would be considered artists. Not to say that everyone that holds a boom mic is an artist, but definitely the director, the actors, the cinematographer, as well as others would be the artists of the project. Now, if the people making the film are all American but are filming in Canada, from the vantage point of the artists, I would say that it is still an American film. Look at it this way, if an American photographer travels the world taking photos everywhere he or she goes, does that make the photos non-American? After all, the American artist did all the work, he or she just traveled to other places to get the work done. On the other hand, if Canada is helping pay for the film, does that mean Canada should have the rights to call it a Canadian film? In some cases it may seem like they should, but as I said before, there is no definite right or wrong in these cases.
After all, the entire system of Hollywood was based on moving your production somewhere that was cheaper. Before the boom of movie-makers in Hollywood, that area was nothing but deserts. The whole reason people moved their film studios out there was because no one owned it yet, so who was going to charge them to use the land? No one!
Some would argue that moving an American film to Canada in order to save money makes it un-American, but since when has doing whatever you can to decrease costs, thus increase profits, been un-American? To me, saving money at all costs just screams, "AMERICAN!"
For instance, when it comes to a film being Canadian vs. being American, there are so many shades of gray that it nearly makes it impossible to have a right or wrong answer. I think one way to look at it is to remember that even big-budget, feature films are still works of art. These works of art are done by many people, who would be considered artists. Not to say that everyone that holds a boom mic is an artist, but definitely the director, the actors, the cinematographer, as well as others would be the artists of the project. Now, if the people making the film are all American but are filming in Canada, from the vantage point of the artists, I would say that it is still an American film. Look at it this way, if an American photographer travels the world taking photos everywhere he or she goes, does that make the photos non-American? After all, the American artist did all the work, he or she just traveled to other places to get the work done. On the other hand, if Canada is helping pay for the film, does that mean Canada should have the rights to call it a Canadian film? In some cases it may seem like they should, but as I said before, there is no definite right or wrong in these cases.
After all, the entire system of Hollywood was based on moving your production somewhere that was cheaper. Before the boom of movie-makers in Hollywood, that area was nothing but deserts. The whole reason people moved their film studios out there was because no one owned it yet, so who was going to charge them to use the land? No one!
Some would argue that moving an American film to Canada in order to save money makes it un-American, but since when has doing whatever you can to decrease costs, thus increase profits, been un-American? To me, saving money at all costs just screams, "AMERICAN!"
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)