5.6.7

The first two chapters were quintessential examples of semi-boring, overly technical textbook chapters. But, nonetheless, had interesting points- If they were bulleted it would have been just greeeattttt.
Anyway, the development of T.V. and cable is the most significant technical development that has brought us to where we are today, media wise, besides internet. It was the most revolutionary introduction to the ever-expansive media whirlwind that our culture is stuck in today.At the time it was new, and most likely extremely mesmerizing- as it still is today. It is a form of acquiring information, being entertained, and is also an escapists perfect vacation.... momentarily indulging in a life/situation that is not the one you are living. It is a fantastic way to keep distracted from the realities of life. It is also a way for corporations to make billions of dollars, and a perfect space for advertisement, although we are so advanced now that some have the choice to skip all advertisements, focusing only on what they want to see. It is a space where you can choose who to listen to and what to see, which is what some people can't wait to do after a long hard day at work with a boring, pissy boss to listen to. Talk about being addicted to freedom..
Film, what a great medium (Thank You to all that have taken part in the development of movie making!). I found chapter 7 to be much more interesting then the first two. What is most interesting is thinking about how things were, compared to how they are today. The novelty factor on everything has dissipated into space, making it rare for anything to seem all that new and exciting. Maybe I'm just hard to please.
I found it really nice to not only read about one or two aspects of films and filmmaking, but all elements during the progression of what is now the highest grossing industry...(Hollywood). Everything from the development of a narrative to the way in which a film is shown was illustrated in this chapter. This is one of the reasons films can cause a sense of solidarity in our culture- there are so many elements, and when they are put together well it becomes a very moving work of art. Or, a really "entertaining" depiction of popular culture and how icons can become icons, which can be just as interesting as a great film. It is all relative and under certain terms neither one can be held higher then the other. They exist independently of each other and serve different purposes as forms of entertainment.I'd say lets just hope for more great movies/ T.v. shows and for artists not to become suckers for money, indulging in what is popular, not what they truly want to create.

interesting

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-08/27/and-vinyly

Chapters 1&2

The rate at which Media has expanded and reached the masses is extraordinary, and concerning. It has infiltrated every aspect of our waking life, and has become practically inescapable, resulting in an inability to not be influenced by it. Whether or not we choose to indulge in popular culture, we are, on some level, effected by it. The amount of images alone make us desire to have a certain look, a certain object, or just a certain "lifestyle" etc. Along with images comes sounds, jingles, and stories which all compliment images and work with them to make the viewer more drawn in, and maybe even convinced. This is where the comparison of high and low culture can come into play. "Artifacts" of high culture can most likely stand on their own, allowing the viewer to devote more of his/her intellectual interaction whereas in low culture, much of the time information is given to you and needs no further contemplation. It can be analyzed further in terms of how popular culture attempts to suck you in, but isn't usually too deep in content.
Seems to be that many great works of art are recycled in an attempt to inform the general public, but aren't fully understood, rather appreciated on a surface level as an icon of pop culture. What a bummer.
It seems there is a popularity among things that will momentarily distract you from life, or, allow you to indulge in a life outside of the one your living, e.g. virtual. Just being on the internet, watching TV, or playing video games would do the trick. You can learn, be entertained, be distracted, meet people, and become a part of something you may not feel so much a part of in real life. All of these options seem to make things a bit confusing, and makes it hard for the recipients of this information to sort through it and find what they really want to find. It seems that rather, many people accept and believe the information that is given to them via TV or radio, because its what they hear and not what they try to find. It is readily available to be eaten up and lived by which is much easier than rejecting it and trying to formulate a philosophical path by which to live.

Malcolm Gladwell

Interesting article in relation to our conversation in class last week. Being I am not part of any social media site yet, I cannot say if I would or would not feel deeply connected to a cause through internet participation- I doubt it. I feel facebook/twitter etc are good tools for spreading the word on a specific issue, but not so much for anything beyond that. As was said in the article, "The things that King needed in Birmingham—discipline and strategy—were things that online social media cannot provide."
I agree very much with this. Perhaps a seed can be planted on a social media network, but if you really want change it has to sprout outside of the parameters of a computer screen and really become something. Yes, great for bringing attention to an issue, finding people with the same concerns, but then if you want to take action, meet up and speak in real life. It seems it can be a lazy attempt to be part of something. If you are truly devoted to a cause, there are ways to seek out organizations apart from online groups.
Another great example of what the computer is capable of is the case of the stolen cell phone. In real life, opposed to virtual, you couldn't get that many people to watch a video or become aware of something so trivial if you tried for a week. But, online, thousands are informed. The speed that information travels is incomparable to word of mouth spreading of information which is why social media networks can be a starting point for a small revolution of sorts, or just a tool to inform the public of a certain issue. That doesn't mean most people are the least bit interested, perhaps more of a superficial "Have you heard of so and so? WOWW." I think today anything is worth a try even if it is superficial, as most things seem to be.