http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFTLKWw542g&ob=av2e
So for my free post I decided to analyze Billy Joels song, "We didnt start the fire". Basically the song is one big time line. The significant events that he decides to sing about are between 40s and 80s. Throughout the song his lists events/tragedies that society has been dealing with for a long time. The chorus of the song is "we didn't start the fire", referring to his generation. The fire is all the turmoil society has been dealing with sense the beginning of time. To blame one generation for all the problems in the world is ignorant and not realistic. The generation before ones is the main cause for the problems the current generation has to deal with. In essence the problems keep rolling on to the next one.
Why I bring this song about is because I realistically wonder how big of an influence a song can be to the general public? Honestly if it wasn't for Billy Joel a respectable singer and song writer, I doubt this song would of even been recognized. So it brings up the next question, is the public listening just because of the artist or is the song really being seen for its deeper message? Realistically I have no idea how effective this song was in changing the world and our outlooks. Though this might sound kind of corny, but I do believe if it made a difference in one person life it made a difference in the world. People cant give up on changing the world even if it doesn't reach the masses.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Copycat
Scream and Natural Born Killers are movies with extreme cases of serial killers.
Its a pretty big shocker to think people would actually try to copy these two movies for the simple fact of the actors involved in each one. Were talking about Woody Harrelson here. The same Woody Harrelson that was in the movie White Man Cant Jump, enough said. How and why someone would try and replicate such a fictional story I have no idea. The biggest surprise to me is that these people feel like their actions are justified because they made a movie about what they did. Thats just mind boggling to me.
Realistically movies like Scream and Natural Born Killers will be made forever. Whether it is for better or for worse that these movies should be made is somewhat irrelevant. I have a hard time believing that there will ever be a statute that restricts movie plots. There will always be people in this world that will take fictional stories way too insanely. How can our world predict a movie that is dangerously copycatable? The answer is we cant. Its not the movie that is the problem in this situation, but is the people themselves. As long as we have people in this world, we will have "insanity".
Its a pretty big shocker to think people would actually try to copy these two movies for the simple fact of the actors involved in each one. Were talking about Woody Harrelson here. The same Woody Harrelson that was in the movie White Man Cant Jump, enough said. How and why someone would try and replicate such a fictional story I have no idea. The biggest surprise to me is that these people feel like their actions are justified because they made a movie about what they did. Thats just mind boggling to me.
Realistically movies like Scream and Natural Born Killers will be made forever. Whether it is for better or for worse that these movies should be made is somewhat irrelevant. I have a hard time believing that there will ever be a statute that restricts movie plots. There will always be people in this world that will take fictional stories way too insanely. How can our world predict a movie that is dangerously copycatable? The answer is we cant. Its not the movie that is the problem in this situation, but is the people themselves. As long as we have people in this world, we will have "insanity".
Monday, October 18, 2010
Pokemon
http://media.photobucket.com/image/first%20pokemon/sXeProdigy/pokemon.gif
When I looked at this blog entry for this week only one thing came to mind....Pokemon. When I was in elementary school I would watch this show religiously. Everyday I would come home from school and watch my two episodes before my mother forced me to do my homework.
After the first 25 episodes, they came out with a trading card game. Now being the little entrepreneur I was I started selling these cards in school. My friends and I would sell several cards a week to each other. The funny thing is we would never actually play the game. It was all about who had the best cards and what kind of leverage they had on one another.
In essence we wanted to be little Pokemon trainers that the show portrayed. The show itself showed us how to be these Pokemon trainers. The cards allowed us to carry out that dream. Everyone wanted to be a Pokemon trainer. Everyone and anyone wanted to be involved with Pokemon at this time. It was an elementary students drug. Looking back on this it is quite amazing how loyal and involved we were to this game. A kids imagination is quite a tool.
When I looked at this blog entry for this week only one thing came to mind....Pokemon. When I was in elementary school I would watch this show religiously. Everyday I would come home from school and watch my two episodes before my mother forced me to do my homework.
After the first 25 episodes, they came out with a trading card game. Now being the little entrepreneur I was I started selling these cards in school. My friends and I would sell several cards a week to each other. The funny thing is we would never actually play the game. It was all about who had the best cards and what kind of leverage they had on one another.
In essence we wanted to be little Pokemon trainers that the show portrayed. The show itself showed us how to be these Pokemon trainers. The cards allowed us to carry out that dream. Everyone wanted to be a Pokemon trainer. Everyone and anyone wanted to be involved with Pokemon at this time. It was an elementary students drug. Looking back on this it is quite amazing how loyal and involved we were to this game. A kids imagination is quite a tool.
Homecoming Party
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39710013
This story takes place at an apartment complex near Cal University. It was during homecoming weekend for the school when it erupted in gun fire. Late that night supposedly a non-student attempted to join an off campus party. After he was denied access he pulled out a firearm and shot several times. The shooter killed one person and injured two more. The shooter was arrested not to long after the shooting. He was found at his house where he was forced to surrender. Earlier that day it was also found that the kid that was shot was involved in a 6 car pill-up.
It was interesting to me that the media had written about this car crash as well. In essence it really had nothing to do with the story what so ever. I felt like it was just trying to make the story more dramatic than it actually was. This story kind of reminds me of our Springfest. This article is about kids partying at their own school which involved a freak accident. Springfest and this article have the common denominator of certain kids that shouldnt be there in the first place. Is it our fault that we have big parties and other kids want to join? Maybe it is and maybe it isnt. In the long run the students of JMU are repeating the consequences of these irrelevant kids, as are the kids from Cal University.
This story takes place at an apartment complex near Cal University. It was during homecoming weekend for the school when it erupted in gun fire. Late that night supposedly a non-student attempted to join an off campus party. After he was denied access he pulled out a firearm and shot several times. The shooter killed one person and injured two more. The shooter was arrested not to long after the shooting. He was found at his house where he was forced to surrender. Earlier that day it was also found that the kid that was shot was involved in a 6 car pill-up.
It was interesting to me that the media had written about this car crash as well. In essence it really had nothing to do with the story what so ever. I felt like it was just trying to make the story more dramatic than it actually was. This story kind of reminds me of our Springfest. This article is about kids partying at their own school which involved a freak accident. Springfest and this article have the common denominator of certain kids that shouldnt be there in the first place. Is it our fault that we have big parties and other kids want to join? Maybe it is and maybe it isnt. In the long run the students of JMU are repeating the consequences of these irrelevant kids, as are the kids from Cal University.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
The Info
In this article the author brings forward the problems our culture has conveying reliable information to the public. Saying there really isnt any source of trusted information in the world today. He gives several examples of trusted reporters back in the day. Maybe these reporters were better at tricking the public with less drastic measures. Who knows? He goes on and talks about the many causes of inaccurate information. The first one he talks about is the bandwagon effect. This is a pretty self explanatory concept. People tend to relate to the overwhelming majority. An example of this would be when a teacher asks her students to raise their hand for A or B. You believe its B but sense everyone else is raising their hand for A you go along with the crowd. Another example of this is when a sports team is doing exceptionally well. People tend to support the teams that are doing the best (unlike the cowboys). Im not going to lie, I recently became a Miami Heat fan. For people that don't know the Miami heat recently acquired 3 of the best NBA players in the league. Im a fan. The second one he talks about is the confirmation bias. This is where a person only looks for information that supports their own opinions. This tends to happen a lot in jury cases. People try to find professionals in the field that support their beliefs. The third one he talks about is the base rate fallacy. This is basically where we favor our own experiences rather than empirical evidence. The last is the cognitive dissonance. We discredit evidence that is not inline with our ideologies. I feel like a lot of old people have this problem.
I think the Department of Information is a great idea. It would be extremely hard to put into action because of the 1st Amendment, but I think it would work. The constitution is made to change. The only problem I see is the money factor. I feel like money, like it always does will have a significant pull in what gets published and what doesn't. Just a thought though.
I think the Department of Information is a great idea. It would be extremely hard to put into action because of the 1st Amendment, but I think it would work. The constitution is made to change. The only problem I see is the money factor. I feel like money, like it always does will have a significant pull in what gets published and what doesn't. Just a thought though.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Dora the Explorer
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39572576/ns/today-entertainment/
This article brings about many interesting facts and concerns minors deal with when their talents require them to sign contracts. Recently the voice of the hit show "Dora the Explorer", Caitlin Sanchez has attempted to bring about litigation towards the ever famous Nickelodeon. Caitlin signed a contract with them when she was 12 years old. The contracted stated she would get paid around 5,000 dollars per episode and receive a portion of Dora's merchandising revenue. Caitlin was let go after two years after hitting puberty. The teen soon followed up with a lawsuit saying she signed an "unconscionable" contract. In essence meaning her lawyer wasn't knowledgeable enough to sign for her. The lawsuit brings about millions of dollars that Nickelodeon would owe Caitlin. The article brings about how many actors without much leverage sign bad deals all the time, so why should this one be different?
I picked this article because it brings about many different issues that minors face with signing formal contracts. Who is to blame here? Should the parents be more knowledgeable of their daughters situation? Should the lawyer be held accountable for the problems Caitlin is facing now? This article brings about the importance of how careful one needs to be when signing for a minor. Also, the forethought that one day Caitlin would hit puberty should of been taken into consideration. I'm not sure if the lawyer and parents were really being realistic about the whole situation.
This article brings about many interesting facts and concerns minors deal with when their talents require them to sign contracts. Recently the voice of the hit show "Dora the Explorer", Caitlin Sanchez has attempted to bring about litigation towards the ever famous Nickelodeon. Caitlin signed a contract with them when she was 12 years old. The contracted stated she would get paid around 5,000 dollars per episode and receive a portion of Dora's merchandising revenue. Caitlin was let go after two years after hitting puberty. The teen soon followed up with a lawsuit saying she signed an "unconscionable" contract. In essence meaning her lawyer wasn't knowledgeable enough to sign for her. The lawsuit brings about millions of dollars that Nickelodeon would owe Caitlin. The article brings about how many actors without much leverage sign bad deals all the time, so why should this one be different?
I picked this article because it brings about many different issues that minors face with signing formal contracts. Who is to blame here? Should the parents be more knowledgeable of their daughters situation? Should the lawyer be held accountable for the problems Caitlin is facing now? This article brings about the importance of how careful one needs to be when signing for a minor. Also, the forethought that one day Caitlin would hit puberty should of been taken into consideration. I'm not sure if the lawyer and parents were really being realistic about the whole situation.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Student and Sex Video
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39524970
This article is one big debate about whether or not two college students performed a hate crime or not. The story starts off talking about two roommates that attend Rutgers University in New Jersey. One night the one roommate asked the other roommate for the room alone for a couple of hours. He happily complied and left the room. Before he left though, he had set up a web cam to capture any activity in the room. To his surprise his web cam came back with some significant footage. The footage involved his roommate with two other males. All the article said was that it was an "encounter" between the young men. Later that week the one roommate along with a female broadcasted the footage over the internet. Three days later the roommate that was in the video committed suicide by jumping off the George Washington bridge. In essence the lawyers on each side are trying to decide whether or not this case is subject to prosecution of a hate crime. Both the male and female are both facing up to five years in prison. They are being charged with the invasion of privacy. In relation to the article we read there are several unique characteristics that hold true to this internet article. One that is obvious is the ideal victim. Social norms are in contradiction with the values the one roommate holds. Being gay in a society that is not overly accepting is quite difficult to manage. I believe this is one of the main reasons this article recieved so much attention. Also, being publicly broadcasted over the internet helps mass numbers of people watch the actual video. The article talks about the parents trying to enforce action, and to find ways this will never happen again to any other student. Enabling a CJ policy to change the future is their main goal. In my opinion I wouldnt qualify this article as entertainment. It is obvious that this article will receive mass amounts of attention for its uniqueness. If something receives a lot of attention in the media does it qualify as entertainment?
This article is one big debate about whether or not two college students performed a hate crime or not. The story starts off talking about two roommates that attend Rutgers University in New Jersey. One night the one roommate asked the other roommate for the room alone for a couple of hours. He happily complied and left the room. Before he left though, he had set up a web cam to capture any activity in the room. To his surprise his web cam came back with some significant footage. The footage involved his roommate with two other males. All the article said was that it was an "encounter" between the young men. Later that week the one roommate along with a female broadcasted the footage over the internet. Three days later the roommate that was in the video committed suicide by jumping off the George Washington bridge. In essence the lawyers on each side are trying to decide whether or not this case is subject to prosecution of a hate crime. Both the male and female are both facing up to five years in prison. They are being charged with the invasion of privacy. In relation to the article we read there are several unique characteristics that hold true to this internet article. One that is obvious is the ideal victim. Social norms are in contradiction with the values the one roommate holds. Being gay in a society that is not overly accepting is quite difficult to manage. I believe this is one of the main reasons this article recieved so much attention. Also, being publicly broadcasted over the internet helps mass numbers of people watch the actual video. The article talks about the parents trying to enforce action, and to find ways this will never happen again to any other student. Enabling a CJ policy to change the future is their main goal. In my opinion I wouldnt qualify this article as entertainment. It is obvious that this article will receive mass amounts of attention for its uniqueness. If something receives a lot of attention in the media does it qualify as entertainment?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)