Oral Presentation

http://youtu.be/2RB2UQAuWnU

Unit 4, Issue 12

Is Hate Speech in the Media Directly Affecting Our Culture?

In the article discussing hate speech in the media, there are two separate arguments debating why or why not the media is to blame for affecting our culture. Hate speech is a tricky subject within the United States  due to Freedom of Speech Rights. How far is really too far and does the media encourage and promote hate speech or does it just act as a middle man to provide open lines of communication? Giroux is responsible for "examining specific media texts and identifying how information and entertainment media normalize a culture of cruelty by disguising meanness and power in entertainment ways, thereby creating cultural products that value the beating of homeless people, contempt for non-commercial public spheres, and scorn for those who are disenfranchised.". He feels strongly that the media is responsible for promoting hate speech and hides behind the First Amendment and entertainment as a means of justification.

Weatherby and Scoggins on the other hand argue that the studies found dealing with hate websites is limited and not to be held responsible for affecting an entire culture. They discuss the purpose of the media, specifically the internet and what their main goal is. They say that their number one focus in promoting themselves is to attract new people, who fall into their category. However, they do not focus on trying to change others views. Primarly they just want to organize a group of extremists and provide an outlet for those who are like them. Personally I feel that the media is not responsible for promoting hate speech but they do play an active role in getting information out there with an effortless and fast rate. As long as the First Amendment is in place it will always be a controversial topic.

Unit 6, Issue 18

Are People Better Informed in the Information Society?

Overall, people are better informed in the information society thanks to technological developments and fast access. Between cell phone's ability to do everything from; connect to the internet, text message your boss, face time your significant other, call your grandmother overseas, check your bank account, and get your daily news and e-mails, it's as if society's life fits in the palm of their hand. The question remains though, just because the quantity of information and interaction has increased...is there still a high level of quality communication? In the research provided in this article, lower-income children are provided with computers and internet access to see how much or little their success shifts based on the technology provided. In the "yes" argument they write, "having a home computer has been associated with having higher test scores in reading, even after controlling for family income and other factors related to reading test scores".

The "no" argument is quite compelling as well. Bauerlein says, "All the ingredients for making an informed and intelligent citizen are in place. But it hasn't happened". He argues that the average American citizen, particularly the youth has become so absorbed in their immediate social network that they have abandoned caring about their local communities and global issues. It is as if  the progression of technology is moving us backwards. I must admit personally, I don't think increased technology is a good or bad thing it is just change that society must adapt to.

Unit 1, Issue 3

Do Media Represent Realistic Images of Arabs?

It is fair to say that the media does not represent realistic images of all Arabs. In fact, since the attacks that took place in New York city on the date Americans will never forget, 9/11 Arabs have been portrayed as terrorists and people that should be feared. They have been categorized and stereotyped in articles, television shows, movies, news, and airports. Overall they are perceived as a threat because of the haunting events that took place in the past. They are also viewed as scary because they are different than most people in the U.S. and society in general tends to shun that which is unknown or unfamiliar. 

However thanks to a recent shift in the Middle East, Arabs are now gaining a voice to express that they do not all feel the same or think the same as fellow members of their surroundings. Thanks to technology, particularly blogs Arabs are able for the first time in history to express themselves without constraints. Many of them do not believe in violence and disagree strongly with the way society functions. They voice their opinions on topics ranging from everyday life, to the ancient political system, the unfair cruelty, and their dreams of a more educated and liberated society one day. They also write about their frustration with being feared. 

Edward Saaed wrote about otherness and not belonging. Otherness has to do with a person, who is different. For example someone who is dressed differently, speaks a different language, looks exotic, and has dark eyes, skin, and hair. All of these things tend to instill fear in others who are not accustom to these features or cultural differences. When a person experiences a personal interaction with someone though, it's more difficult to "other" them. Overall I would say that the media portrays Arabs in a negative light but we must be intelligent enough individuals to research other cultures and have a more open mind and create our own image of them. 

Unit 1, Issue 4 Dworkin and Levine

Do Media Cause Individuals to Develop Negative Body Images?

In this article, there are two clear sides, which differ in opinion on the topic of whether or not the media causes individuals to develop a negative body image or not. Dworkin and Wachs, believe the media is highly responsible for negatively influencing society and the way they view themselves. One's identity and self worth has become attached to superficialities such as: maintaining a weight that is low in body fat, wearing name brand clothing, getting regular manicures/pedicures, and indulging in other forms of self pampering treatments. Each and every day countless forms of imagery reach into peoples cell phones, computers, televisions, minds, and psyches ultimately causing them to have self doubt and lowered self-esteem. With technology on a constant uproar it is hard to ignore the visual ads that surround us all each and every day.

Dworkin made an interesting statement in her article saying, "ads tell men and women that a healthy body is attainable if they buy the products and pamper themselves. Fat becomes something to be feared, and grooming practices and fashion are sold as imperatives". These concepts have been engrained in the average Americans mind since they struck puberty. Being desirable has everything to do with external appeal and nothing to do with one's mind or soul anymore. The media is responsible for feeding into people's emotions and vulnerabilities. It's as if they play with them and almost force them into buying products to help get closer to a never ending journey towards perfection.

As for the "no" argument it does not resonate with the same force that the "yes" article does. Levine and Murnen believe that the media is a limiting factor in determining people body image. They state instead, "a wide range of social, behavioral, and cultural  issues over time" contribute to negative body images. Where this could easily be considered a valid point it does not even seem close to the strength of which the media demands. I personally agree strongly with the "yes" arguement...just look around...what people want is in your face at all times!

Unit 3, Issue 9 Julia Fox and Barry Hollander

Does Fake News Mislead the Public?

This article covered a few different concepts that were interesting in terms of the way viewers interpret the news they receive. The different styles of media coverage  and methods of delivery were discussed in great detail in the text. There was a section that talked about the difference between recall versus recognition. In terms of the meta concepts, there were three primary ones that were focused on. They consisted of substantive coverage, hype, and humor. Surprisingly, hype and humor tend to reach the masses more than substantive news does. Although the information is subject to undergo the opinion of the comedian delivering the news, it is still politically relevant and reaches a specific target audience.

As part of the younger generation, I have first hand experience in dealing with fake news. Overall many of my peers don't watch the news and  rarely pick up a newspaper to get their information. However, we are constantly updated with the latest newsfeed and posts sent via facebook , twitter, myspace, etc... If we can't find what we're looking for there, any details can be found at just the click of a button. I like to consider us the "Now Generation"! We want everything yesterday and with technology on  a constant progression forward, we have become accustom to a world that provides information quickly and effortlessly...even if it's not always 100% factual. Beneath most news involving hype in humor there is some truth and typically a few facts. It is hard to know what to believe though because of the skewed opinions and comedy that overshadows the truth of what's actually going on.

To answer the initial question though, "Does Fake News Mislead the Public?" the answer is yes. Because of the speed at which information is delivered to the general public, many of the details are not fully sorted out. Also with gossip columns, entertainment shows, and comedians with a voice it is hard to tell what is factual and what is opinion. Although newspapers are viewed as an archaic form of getting information these days, it was better in the sense that there was more attention payed to detail and less emphasis placed on the hype and humor. Society is easily swayed and out of time, therefore whatever they hear most instantaneously is what they conclude to perceive as truth.

Does the media influence voters on legalization of marijuana?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTRuRtavYMw