Please view Hands of (HOW WE VIEW) the World (I will explain my choice later in the post).
Wow. It is already the end of school. It's funny how slowly and quickly this came up. I have really loved this American Studies class but I will admit blogging is not my favorite part. I like to describe my relationship with the blog as something that I appreciate. I appreciate the fact that it allows you to link to news articles, photos and videos and I appreciate how you can comment on other people's posts. But I do not like blogging. I think about potential blog posts often- reading the newspaper, watching movies and even in everyday discussions with my friends- the part that is the hardest part for me is putting it to paper, or rather to keyboard. It has been a problem consistent with the whole year. I believe that it is the reason my blogging is so scattered. I can come up with the ideas easy enough but I delay the process of writing them as long as I can get away with.
Even though my attitude towards blogging hasn't changed much, I feel that I have learned valuable lessons in order to make my posts better each time. My recent blog post Oxidado was where I learned the importance of blogging about "hot" issues. I blogged about something I had just seen on AOL news about 5 minutes earlier and ended up getting over 640 views in just two days. Also with my posts like The Greatest Movie Ever Sold and Oxidado I used videos for the first time. I really enjoyed linking to videos because personally I would rather watch a clip than read an article and I feel it can be a successful way to get information across that cannot just be seen through images and text.
I chose Hands of (HOW WE VIEW) the World as the blog post of choice because I feel that it is the post that best emulates the goals of the blog. In the post, I responded to Dani's earlier post but took a different spin on it, I incorporated an outside source and used photos and asked questions.
All in all, although blogging wasn't my favorite I really learned a lot (this is sounding cheesier by the second but its true, promise!) and I think if I am so motivated I might keep on blogging. You never know...
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Hands of (HOW WE VIEW) the World
This is a response to a post Dani made called: Uniquely American.
In Dani's blog post she showed AT&Ts ad campaign, where hands were painted to represent the different countries of the world. While Dani focused on what America's hands might look like, I am goin to choose a different approach of analysing the hands. I think how AT&T chose to define the other countries is very interesting as well. While the photos are not necessarily the most historical or monumental building or image that country would choose, they are representations of how America views those other countries.
For example Japan and China:
While there are many images that Japan or China might choose to represent their country (either through traditional buildings, and economic or technological advances), AT&T chose to represent Japan and China as how many american's view these countries, through a sort of distant and mystical tradition sense. This representation of Japan or China is not uncommon, it is very much seeing these countries through the lens of the disney movie Mulan, without regard for any current culture.
How do Americans commonly view other countries? In what ways does this campaign represent how American's percieve other countries? Is this a positive perception?
In Dani's blog post she showed AT&Ts ad campaign, where hands were painted to represent the different countries of the world. While Dani focused on what America's hands might look like, I am goin to choose a different approach of analysing the hands. I think how AT&T chose to define the other countries is very interesting as well. While the photos are not necessarily the most historical or monumental building or image that country would choose, they are representations of how America views those other countries.
For example Japan and China:
While there are many images that Japan or China might choose to represent their country (either through traditional buildings, and economic or technological advances), AT&T chose to represent Japan and China as how many american's view these countries, through a sort of distant and mystical tradition sense. This representation of Japan or China is not uncommon, it is very much seeing these countries through the lens of the disney movie Mulan, without regard for any current culture.
How do Americans commonly view other countries? In what ways does this campaign represent how American's percieve other countries? Is this a positive perception?
Oxidado
When I got home from school today my older brother immediately showed me this news clip. Following the epidemic of the drug Oxidado (originally in Brazil), the video highlights the dangers of the drug and why it has been brought into focus.
In both videos not only the horrible side effects of this drug are shown, but also its mass availability and why it is receiving attention now. In the first video (link) at 0:28 the drug is described as so deadly because of how easy it is to get a hold of. Costing only $1.00, this drug is so threatening because it allows all classes to get hooked and have the financial ability to stay hooked. But almost more shockingly is the 1st video's clip at 1:20. The drug Oxi has "been around for almost 2 decades" but is just gaining serious news attention now. The very deadly drug, most users die within the first year of starting (1:16), is only gaining news attention as it transfers into the upper class.
This reminded me on a much smaller scale of the "big ditch" in Winnetka that we discussed in class. Even after 30 citizen's deaths, the train tracks were not changed until a very powerful, wealthy man's wife was killed. After this accident the problem was taken into focus and fixed.
How does society respond differently to the same problem in different classes? Why do problems gain more media attention when they affect upper classes? How does the rate of change and correction differ between the upper and lower class issues?
In both videos not only the horrible side effects of this drug are shown, but also its mass availability and why it is receiving attention now. In the first video (link) at 0:28 the drug is described as so deadly because of how easy it is to get a hold of. Costing only $1.00, this drug is so threatening because it allows all classes to get hooked and have the financial ability to stay hooked. But almost more shockingly is the 1st video's clip at 1:20. The drug Oxi has "been around for almost 2 decades" but is just gaining serious news attention now. The very deadly drug, most users die within the first year of starting (1:16), is only gaining news attention as it transfers into the upper class.
This reminded me on a much smaller scale of the "big ditch" in Winnetka that we discussed in class. Even after 30 citizen's deaths, the train tracks were not changed until a very powerful, wealthy man's wife was killed. After this accident the problem was taken into focus and fixed.
How does society respond differently to the same problem in different classes? Why do problems gain more media attention when they affect upper classes? How does the rate of change and correction differ between the upper and lower class issues?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)