There exists a list of the 12 most annoying pieces of technology. I agree with most of them on there. Technology for the sake of technology can be pretty ridiculous. Using technology just so that we can gets annoying when there are other ways to accomplish something that are far less annoying. The only thing that I don't agree with on the list has to be the "touchless bathrooms." Granted there are times when you can't get the sink to work, but there is usually more then one sink right next to each other so you simply need to move over. It cuts back on water consumption and germ spreading. Another of the technologies that i don't really have a problem with is the voice recognition technology. I understand that there are those that get frustrated with it when they can't get the software to understand what they are saying. I personally don't have too much of a problem with it because I am a voice actor and have become accustomed to over enunciating my words. If you are having trouble with the voice recognition software then I suggest you speak slowly and ridiculously in order for the software to understand what you are saying.
One bit of technology that I find incredibly annoying is the email notification feature that comes with any website that you signed up for. This includes Facebook. I DO NOT need an email sent to me every time one of my friends updates their status or someone makes a slight change to an event I'm attending. I have my email linked directly to my phone which is incredibly convenient and helpful especially with school emails and such. I can't stand it though when I get 15 emails in 10 minutes from Facebook because one of my friends is bored and it ends up blowing up my phone.
Another piece of technology I find incredibly annoying are the bluetooth ear pieces. When people go into a store and are shopping around, you will see them and it seems like they are talking to themselves. Often times I will walk by someone and they are looking in my direction while they are talking and then there will be that awkward moment when you're not sure if they are speaking to you or not. How lazy do you have to be to walk around a store and shop that you can't take the time to hold a phone to your ear for a few minutes. These wireless devices should only be used in a car where the situation requires you to use both of your hands. If you are too busy that you have to take a phone call during every moment of your life, then you need to take a step back and realize there is more to life then that.
I am astounded at the progress that our scientists have achieved in the field of technology. To think that barely 30 years ago we had computers that would take up entire rooms in order to compute a series of numbers and now we can talk to people around the world and even communicate with a rover on a different planet with a device that fits in our pocket. It is a credit to our species that we have been able to achieve so much.
With every advancement comes problems though. We are seeing an increase in those that become addicted to the technologies developed. Which will lead to the decreased ability for humans to survive without this technology. If you go to Malawi Africa, there are people there that wonder where their next meal is going to come from and live in huts in the dirt, but they have cell phones. This is an example of how technology has helped this country stay connected but if the increase in technology is not regulated, it could have a detrimental effect on the country.
A recent study found that 1/3 of the U.S. population do not use Facebook or Twitter. They stated this fact as if it were a horrible statistic. I believe that it is a good thing. There is way too much stress, drama, and pressure put onto people because of these sites. It gives me hope that there are still people out there that know how to socialize with a handshake instead of a keyboard. I personally have both a Twitter and Facebook account. The main reason is that there are certain announcements and postings that are critical to my education and career posted on these sites, though I do use them for entertainment purposes as well.
If the internet was shut down today, our world would collapse. The 1/3 of Americans not umbilicalled to the internet would be able to survive with very little difficulty. However, that means that about 210 MILLION people would be without a lifeline to their lives. I understand that not everyone that uses these sites are addicted to them like myself, but it is disconcerting that so many people are linked to them and the people that are not are being chastised for it. I say let them live their lives the healthy way and let us learn from them.
Well first off we can't immediately start pointing fingers at Samsung and calling them evil for practices that they are not directly responsible for. The factories that they have their products constructed at are where these practices take place and it is up to the government to regulate the practices there. This does not exonerate Samsung however because they may have claimed to be unaware of these occurrences but once they found out they didn't take their business elsewhere either.
We can't lay all the blame at Samsung's feet because they are not the only ones at fault. The American public is also to blame. If Samsung were to take their manufacturing and shipping needs elsewhere, their sales would drastically decrease while they made the transition and the public would be so upset that they would cease to buy Samsung products due to lack of supply and the raised cost which would in turn put Samsung in a very financially unstable situation.
Another aspect of the situation is that what is happening in China is not unlike what happened in America about 260 years ago during the industrial revolution. During that time children would work in factories for barely any wages for exorbitant overtime hours. This was the dawn of America becoming a world super power and the leader that we were a few years ago. America's influence is on the decline and is only going to lose more and more influence. Since we outsource all of our business we are simply giving other countries more power over us. We are in debt to too many countries for too much money to be able to recover. China is awakening and will soon become the leading super power of the world. The process they are going through right now is exactly what happened to the united states all those years ago.
As for not using these products, I do not personally have a Samsung device but I am sure that some brand of company I support has used the same techniques sometime in the past. However, the fact remains that our society is continually pushing the development of technology and if we do not get on board we will be left behind. For instance I had to purchase my own cell phone and pay a ridiculous bill every month just so I can have some kind of access to the internet from my house. If I did not have access then I would most likely fail my classes because every single one of them posts assignments and announcements on the internet.
In conclusion, any type of human abuse and extortion is deplorable and should be discouraged but human pain is the price of societal advancement. People die every day in order to fix roads we drive on, pump oil we consume, repair electricity we rely on, and produce technology we depend on. The sad truth is that we are a destructive species and that fact will never change.
The fiasco between Apple and Samsung is absolutely ridiculous. The fact that Apple won the lawsuit was completely due to the fact that the jury was filled laymen and not with electronic and business professionals. If this were to be a fair trial the jury would have to be made up of application developers, business men, and copyright experts. I completely agree with the statement made by Darren Murph from Engadget when he said "Looking at the closing arguments alone, it was plainly obvious that
showing a jury full of laypeople Product A vs. Product B and asking them
-- in a roundabout way -- if they looked alike would lead to an Apple
victory." This is a perfect example of how the lawyers took advantage of the ignorance of the jury in order to get a sketchy victory over Samsung.
Apple is being completely hypocritical with this lawsuit. If they wanted to be completely fair then they should also be paying fines to Android and Windows7 OS for the aspects they have incorporated from them. I personally have an android phone and have enjoyed the awesome convenience of Google Talk for several years. Apple now has the exact same feature that does everything that Google Talk does only they have added a voice that talks back to you and are calling it Siri.
The fact is that now that Apple has won this lawsuit, the friendly sharing of ideas between innovators has ended. Now everyone will be defensive about their ideas and there will be countless lawsuits over everything. The market will get ridiculous and cell phone sales will fall. I will personally never purchase an iphone as android has been ahead of them in every aspect from the beginning. Unfortunately, I think that android phone sales will fall because now there will be so many restrictions on cell phone development.
In conclusion we will basically have to get used to a very bland and straight cut OS if we are not apple customers. We will have to deal with less choice and more round about ways to do what we used to be to do with the touch of a button, or the pinching of our fingers. Android will have to be careful though, if they get too bland and straight cut, they might be getting a lawsuit from Blackberry.
This video shows yet another innovation that Samsung has created. I have researched and tried to find a video for the iphone but every video is either a concept video or a parody. Apparently they are so paranoid that someone will steal their ideas that they won't even advertise them.
Comm203 at Shepherd University has been one of the first communication classes that I have taken. I came into the class with very little knowledge about what was entailed in the communications field and very little ability to do things in the area. This class has greatly influenced my abilities and given me valuable experience.
One of the first things that we touched on was a software called Xmind. This software is used for mapping out ideas. It is a useful tool for organizing ideas and arranging things in a way that makes sense for people that don't think linearly. This software is a great tool, but I didn't use it as much as could have been done. I never really needed it to organize my thoughts because I have been making associations and making connections in my own mind for years. This software is still useful though because as I further my education and take on more projects, I will have more of a need for this software to keep my thoughts straight and produce excellent projects when my plate gets a little full.
Another thing that I was introduced to that I had never done before was blogging. This has been an invaluable asset throughout the semester. It has made me extremely proficient at doing online research and understanding the subject better. I enjoy the blogging because even though it is a somewhat informal way of writing, it allows the freedom to express ones opinion about a subject while still learning and understanding the subject. It has also developed my ability to write. I can now structure a paper a lot better than I used to, whether it be a blog or an academic paper. It has also helped me to better understand how to communicate the idea I'm trying to get across. You can check out my other blogs and see how my skill has developed.
The next major thing that we did was to create a graphic novel. This was a pretty daunting task for me at the beginning as I had never even considered doing it before. This project also introduced me to the Comic Life software. I was able to use it as a guide but was better able to actually draw the comic and get the idea across. This project also helped me in my ability to develop story ideas. The primer for the story was an excellent tool that allowed me to develop my ideas and make changes. After finishing the project, I was able to go back over the primer and view my process which helped me to better understand the way I think and the process for developing ideas.
The biggest project that we had this semester was a video documentary. This project introduced me to several different pieces of software as well as several different techniques. I was able to use Final Cut Pro to produce a video. I was taught how to shoot things with different focal lengths and lighting techniques. The shooting part was the easy part, after which I had to edit the film and put it together. I greatly valued the experience as it also helped me in other classes. I have produced several videos for myself and not just for classes now that I know how to do it. I have also been contracted to produce a film this summer for a missionary in Africa.
All of these new skills have been of tremendous value to me. I have learned so much and plan to continue learning more. These skills have introduced me to new software and techniques. I have picked up these abilities pretty quickly. If I were to be placed in a work environment I am sure I would flourish. I use a PC operating system at home but all of the computers on campus are MAC. Since I am placed in this situation, I have become proficient in being fluent in both MAC and PC operating systems. Now I believe that I have the skills and the potential to enter the workforce and use the software available to me to make me a valuable asset to the company.
There have been many arguments about whether or not violent video games are helpful or harmful. There have been those that say violent video games harm the player and show the player how to commit violent actions or just make them more prone to violent behavior. There are others that say that violent video games are a way for us to release our animal instincts and cope with life. They say that being able to play as an imaginary violent character allows us to be violent and release stress without actually harming the those around us. Now which is it? Are violent video games helpful or harmful?
The answer is somewhat confusing. The answer is both...and neither. The fact of the matter is that violent video games cannot be blamed or praised for what they do. There has simply not been enough research done in the field. Sure there have been studies done to study the behavior of a child exposed to such games but the research doesn't even touch the child's background. The player may have a disturbed home life and the violent video games may exacerbate the situation. However, in the same instance, the violent video games may create a refuge for the child and allow them to get rid of the violence through the game. There is just too little information out there to know for certain.
Now one can obviously form there own opinion about the situation and find research to support their theory. That is perfectly fine. However, that doesn't make their opinion a fact. It simply means that their opinion coincided with the findings of a specific study in a specific situation. To be practical, video games have just not been around long enough to really understand their effect on our psychology and make a concrete decision on their harmful or helpful nature. I mean we're really just now understanding what the antique philosopher's were meaning when they postulated their theories. "It really took us from 1750 to 1985 to really get it"-Kevin Williams when discussing our understanding of Friedrich Nietzsche.
Now as I said before we can always form our own personal opinions but they will never effect the reality of a given situation. From my own personal experience, I would say that video games have provided stress release when I was in need. I have been in a position where I was really stressed about something and in order to take my mind off things I just played a mindless video game which allowed me to calm down and the stress went away. Some games are pretty violent. For instance, Soul Calibur has been one of the biggest fighting games for a long time. This is one of my favorite games to play when I'm stressed out. It allows me to beat the crap out of an imaginary character and release my tension so I don't blow up and freak out on somebody else which would cause major problems.
So in conclusion, it is not possible to know for sure if video games are helpful or harmful. The best thing we can do is live from our personal experience and judge for ourselves whether or not these games are effecting us in a negative or positive way. Parents should also play an active role in their child's life and use their best judgment on whether or not to get a game based on the content. So even though science hasn't told us what the definite answer is, we still have control over our own lives and we should make our decisions according to our own set of values and priorities.
This is actually a very basic and simple question. I would like to learn the basics of video editing. I am mainly interested in the process of audio production and editing but I am also interested in video work. The society we live in today is filled with all types of media. There isn't just one thing that everyone knows how to do and the job market isn't filled with people that only know how to do one thing. In order to succeed in today's job market, one should really have a grasp of how many different things work in order to make themselves more appealing to potential employers. So in essence, I want to learn all I can about film editing, I just might not end up where that will be the main thing I'm doing.
Goffman takes a unique approach to the way we present ourselves to our peers. He likens our everyday interactions to that of a stage in a theater. I tend to agree with this notion as I don't believe that anyone is exactly what you see when you interact with them.
Let's take an analytical look at this idea and see how it relates to the study being done by Sut Jhally and his presentation on The Codes of Gender. To be honest there isn't much analysis that needs to be done regarding these two studies because they are inexorably related. The study done by Sut Jhally did take a couple new ideas and look at them, however, his entire presentation was done by taking Goffman's work and applying it to the field of advertising.
Sut Jhally shows how women and men are presented in advertising and does a terrific job of breaking it down in order for us to understand. See my blog about Women in Advertising for an in depth analysis using Jhally's ideas.
Considering that The Codes of Gender is completely based on the work done by Eric Goffman, I would say that Goffman's work completely supports Sut Jhally's presentation. There is no way that you could separate the two. Jhally is simply taking Goffman's analysis and applying it to the world of advertising.
What is all the fuss over the new Google privacy policy? What has changed about it? Does it affect me personally? What are others saying? Well all of these are very important questions to address when looking at a change in any company's procedures. The important thing is to not follow all the hype, whichever direction it may take, and form your own conclusions about it.
What is all the fuss about? Well the main reason people are getting aggravated is that Google has condensed it's services and instead of having separate policies and information sharing procedures, they have decided to look at users as one entity across the board of its services. Now people are concerned that Google has gone too far and are worried about having their information put on the web and having it shared with too many parties. I can understand this sentiment and have looked into their claims. One technology website calls it "The end of "Don't Be Evil"." They claim that the new policy will collect all the information you upload, search for, and email in order to share that information. The truth in this claim is that, yes Google will collect all this information, but it will not be sharing it with anyone except the other services you use.
Others have taken a different look at it and have claimed that the technology world has overreacted. They claim that it has drastically simplified over 60 different privacy policies Google used to have and made it a much better system. They point out an instance in which congress sent a letter to Google CEO Larry Page expressing concerns on how people can opt out of sharing their information from individual websites or globally. It is true that you can no longer opt out of sharing information from individual services but you can opt out of sharing it globally. I love the answer that one individual provided, "Stop sharing things you don't want tracked." I find this to be common sense but a lot of people just don't grasp the concept.
Does it affect me personally? Of course it does. That is, if you use Google for anything at all it affects you. In Google's new policy, they have implemented a system that they claim will help you have a much better overall experience. Through this new system, Google will put cookies on your machine that allows them to recognize your preferences and track your searches in order to bring up relevant information Google thinks you will find interesting or useful. This may sound like an invasion of privacy but Google offers you the option to prevent all cookies from being placed on your machine. The only problem is that when you block all the cookies, it may alter your Google experience because the cookie function also allows them to remember pertinent information such as what language you prefer to view web pages in.
I feel that this new policy is not that big of a deal ant people are making too much of a fuss about it. When Google says that they will collect the information, they make it plain that it will not be shared with any other services unless explicitly allowed by the user. See the "information sharing" portion of the policy. I am not really bothered by the policy. There is more threat of someone stealing your identity than there is of someone getting hold of your personal information from Google. The only thing you are threatened with is that you may suffer a mild embarrassment if someone sees a compromising photo of you on the internet. In an instance such as this I concur with the previous individual and say don't put things on the internet that you don't want others to see. It's common sense. I am personally a Google+ user and use many of the Google services including this very blog site. The new system that Google offers is helpful because it allows you to have a personalized internet. The internet will be constantly evolving and changing and I personally don't want to be left in the data dust and struggling to catch up.
So if you have a problem with Google or their policies you do have a choice. DON'T USE GOOGLE. There are plenty of other search engines and social networking sites available. Google may be a powerhouse but they don't own the internet. If you are troubled by their policies or their practices you can just elect not to use their services and all will be fine. You are not forced to use Google.
This video shows you what the talking heads are saying. They take a very biased standpoint and do nothing but bash Google while at the same time ridiculing other sites to make you feel like you don't have a choice. This is a classic example of how media warps the facts.
This video shows how useful the new policy will be. We've watched tons of science fiction films where a user is able to have a ridiculously personal experience with the internet and think "wow that's so cool" yet when Google is attempting to do that very thing, everyone cries foul and hops on the bandwagon to bash Google. Change is inevitable people and the sooner we understand that, the better our lives will be.
What exactly is Hermeneutics? It sounds like some kind of weird exercise program when you hear it. What is it exactly though? Who invented it? Well if you do a little research you're able to see that it is very important to our society and helps us better understand ourselves.
So first we must figure out what hermeneutics is. A very basic definition states that hermeneutics is the study of signs. But what does that mean? Well a more formal definition states that hermeneutics is the study of the methodological principles of interpretation. Now let's break that down and see what it means. before understanding what exactly this area of study is let's figure out what a sign is first. A sign is anything that stands for something greater than itself. Now we can move on with our analysis.
So who exactly cam up with the idea to study something that doesn't even represent itself? Well the answer to this question is not very easy to answer. Throughout the ages there have been many different philosophers that have tackled the issue including Plato, Habermas and even Sigmund Freud. So to study the people who addressed the issue doesn't really give us that much of an insight into what hermeneutics is. So we'll have to take a different approach.
How does one study signs? Well a sign is anything that points to something greater than itself so in order to study the sign you have to take several things into mind. First, what is the object? Signs can come in many different forms from a word, an object, or even a piece of music. The second thing to look at is, who is observing the sign? Depending on who is observing this sign will depend on the meaning they get out of it. Thirdly, we should look at who gave the sign that specific meaning. When we figure out who gave the sign the meaning we're able to better understand it.
Now lets take a look at Hermeneutics as a whole. What's the point? Well as a society, everything you look at is pretty much a sign. So the point is to better understand the world because our world is full of signs. So how do we study a world full of signs? Well we have to assign those signs to categories and break them down. Unfortunately, there are many different categories so I will only address a couple of them. The categories I will attempt to cover are Normative, Scientific, Philosophical, Depth, and Natural.
Normative Hermeneutics-interpretation of text
In order to address these categories properly would take hours so I will simply give a brief definition of each. Normative is the art of of text interpretation as a deliberate discipline by a specialist caste. For example priests, judges, and lawyers each study specific texts and their meanings in order to interpret them for the benefit of others. Scientific hermeneutics is the foundational discipline of the human or historical sciences. Basically I see this as meaning to interpret what we have done as a society or to figure out where we came from as human beings. Philosophical is just a general philosophy of existence. In other words the age old question "Why are we here?" Depth hermeneutics is also known as the hermeneutics of suspicion. This area attempts to free our minds from the social dogmas and oppression society places upon us to conform to their ideologies. And finally Natural hermeneutics which is just the interpreting we do on an everyday basis without really thinking about it. See my blog on Media Literacy for more insight into this area.
So that's Hermeneutics in a nutshell. It's a very interesting field of study because it helps to understand what makes us human. As intellectual individuals, it also helps us to better understand the society that we live in. We should all take an interest in hermeneutics because without it, we are nothing but what the society and signs dictate we become.
Without hermeneutics, there is no "unique" only the illusion of free will.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
In the age that we live in, computers have taken hold of the job market. What used to be done by hand is now done by programming. The jobs that used to be in abundance are now rapidly falling to the computer. When the world we live in is changing, we must either learn to adapt or fall behind and get passed by.
In his book A Whole New Mind by Daniel H. Pink, the issues of how we are to overcome the computers is brought to light. He examines the problem and brings possible solutions to the table. The main questions he addresses are as follows; Can a computer do it faster?, Is what I'm offering in demand in an age of abundance?, Can someone overseas do it cheaper? Depending on the answers to these questions will depend greatly on whether or not you will be able to succeed in this computer driven economy. This is where his idea of the "Conceptual Age" comes in to play. The mind is not something that can be outsourced, nor can it be replaced by a computer. True its ability to compute and come up with facts may far exceed that of the human mind. But can it dream? Can it create? Not yet they can't. In this way, we are able to exploit the loophole computers have and thrive.
Pink presents several ways in which we are able to do this. He outlines six essential senses that we need in order to be successful. First is Design. He says that we need to be able to create something that not only functions but also has the ability to engage the user in an experience unlike one they've had before. I believe that is one of the reasons why the ipod has become so popular. It does the same thing that a CD or mp3 player does, but people buy it for the experience and interface it has. Second is Story. This is one of the more important senses. By telling a story and creating conflict instead of just presenting an argument, we are able to relate experiences the user is intimately familiar with and are able to identify in order to bring them closer to your product. Thus giving you an edge over the competition. Third is Symphony. By using this sense and bringing unique invention to the table, we are able to capture the public's attention and curiosity. Again I present the ipod. Even though it does the same thing other devices do, it does them in a unique way and captures our attention. It can play songs from many different albums, just like other devices, but by adding the "cover flow" feature, it grabs our attention and makes it much more interesting. Fourth is Empathy. I believe that this is another of the more important senses. By presenting the user with emotional connections and feelings instead of straight logic, it makes the product more human and thus more accessible. If we present something without the empathetic sense, no matter how well it has been created, it will seem distant and cold. Fifth is Play. This is my personal favorite. By bringing the lighthearted aspect to the product, you make it fun to use instead of just necessary. You want people to say "I get to use this product" rather than "I have to use this product." And last but not least is Meaning. Without meaning, what do you have? Nothing. If we don't give meaning to a product, what's the point? Without meaning, a thing just exists but has no value. You want your product to have value not only to yourself but to others. These six essential senses are what Pink says will bring success in this day and age.
I personally believe that I am well prepared for this age. My entire life has been spent without a television in the house. Many people would view this as unfortunate, but I see it as an advantage. You see, when all the other kids wanted the latest gadget on TV, I was satisfied with a GI Joe action figure or a new pair of shoes. Since I had the simple toys, I had to create the environment they existed in with my imagination. While others were sitting around watching cartoons, I was creating my own. Since I was never exposed to the vast majority of entertainment out there, I was forced to entertain myself. Now I didn't go completely without entertainment, I still got to se movies and watch some TV at relatives houses. Also, I have become quite the avid movie viewer. I am fascinated by all the concepts and skills that are put together in order to create a film. With this type of background, I feel that I am more than prepared to function in this age.
Computers may be taking over the world, but humans are still the ultimate in creativity and imagination. They will never be unwanted and will always be in demand. The world is constantly demanding new and improved ways to entertain and bedazzle them. So through my background and current schooling I believe that I will be prepared to function and flourish in this conceptual age.
As many of us know, women are objectified in advertising. I don't think this is a new phenomenon or that the people in society are unaware of that fact. The truth is that it is everywhere. The difference is that now we are really starting to get a sense of what this means and how we are really portraying these women in a male dominated society.
In this ad we can see almost every behavior used in advertising to depict male and female. It is also quite disturbing if you really take a look at what this ad is saying. It is an advertisement for dress shirts with stripes. As the caption says to hold that tiger it is referring to the woman in the ad. However, the woman is not depicted in an animalistic state at all, aside from the fact she's in stripes and in a cage. Through the analysis presented by Sut Jhally we can see what is really going on with this woman. First of all she is in a seated position and holding her legs. From this we can see that she is not being depicted as a strong and wild tigress, but as a defenseless and vulnerable kitten. She is also looking off to the side in nowhere in particular which seems to make her look distracted and unaware instead of a wary and cunning jungle cat. Her head is also slightly canted and her torso has also been contorted somewhat which further promotes the fact that she is vulnerable and submissive. Also, I feel like the fact that she is without shoes further implies that she is weak and unprepared.
If we take a look at the man we also see the traditional stereotypes associated with him as well. He is seated which is not typical but his legs are crossed and his back is an an extreme upright position which signifies that he is still in control of the situation. He is also looking directly back at the viewer which demonstrates a sense of wariness and knowledge. Also, his hand is gripping the top of the cage in a firm grasp to show his power over the woman whereas she is merely lightly clasping her hands around her knees.
Even our flag is objectified
The most obvious depiction of man's domination over women is the fact that the woman is in an iron cage and the man is sitting on top of it. You couldn't get a better image for that purpose. You can also see that there is a giant padlock which is just sitting there and not really holding anything down which shows that the man himself is enough to contain this "tiger". One more thing that shows how man is valued more than the woman is the caption itself. Notice how the second word "tiger" is capitalized whereas the first is not. Many would not notice something that seems so trivial but we subconsciously put more value on a word that is capitalized than one that is not.
Overall this ad is the epitome of objectivity of men and women in advertising. To think that all these messages are being communicated simply to get you to buy a striped dress shirt is quite astounding. As the caption below the ad states, "you'll have those kittens seeing stars - and stripes - forever" it even makes the connection that by purchasing and wearing these shirts, you will even make your country proud by being patriotic.
The purpose of this entry is to take a look at the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Liberal Education America's Promise (LEAP) in order to assess their similarities and differences. I will attempt to reveal the benefits and downfalls equally and fairly for each of these educational entities.
First we will look at the NCLB. What is it really? What the NCLB aimed to do is target school districts with low income families and provide federal funds to help improve their education. In order to receive and keep these federal funds however, the schools had to prove that the students were indeed learning and bettering their education.
This seems like a simple and helpful system. The fact of the matter is that it is a helpful system and should work in principle. Think about it, through this program, schools should be able to get better books, more computers, and better resources to further educate a child and give it the chance to succeed and get out of their low income situation and create a better life for themselves. It sounds so good and should work. These are the benefits of the NCLB and they look like they are flawless.
There are several major problems however. First of all, the testing standards that the schools must meet in order to obtain and keep the federal funds are quite strict and very high. Where we run into an issue is that these testing standards are so high that it becomes next to impossible for the students to meet them. Especially if they're currently in a low income area and don't have the resources to learn the material required for the test. This gives rise to another problem. When the students aren't performing as well as they should be, this puts stress on the teachers to make them perform better. The teachers have a couple choices in this situation. They can work their tales off and do everything in their power to make do with the resources they are provided and try to get their students to reach the goal, or they can make it seem like their students are meeting it. There have been several instances where the teacher has taken the students tests and changed the answers themselves in order to make it seem like the students are performing as well as they should when they have truthfully fallen short of the mark. My aunt is a vice principal in the Mineral County of West Virginia school district and has confirmed this for me. Another problem is that the NCLB requires the teachers to be "highly qualified". Now this statement in and of itself does not sound like a problem because we would all want our children to be taught by people that know what they're talking about. The problem comes in again with what standard a "highly qualified" individual must meet. The standards are so high that it is becoming increasingly difficult for any teacher to measure up to the standard. Some teachers teach more than one subject in a school because the school has no other option since they can't find specifically qualified teachers in the subject. Chemistry teachers are one primary example. Teachers are required to have a bachelors degree in their field as well as all licenses and certifications required and be able to demonstrate their knowledge of that subject. It is ridiculously difficult to find someone with a bachelor degree in chemistry to teach high school science. These are just a couple of the problems with NCLB. As you can see with these problems, when a teacher changes the students scores in order to keep the funding, the child is not really receiving a very good education. On the other end, with the high standards expected of teachers, it is getting increasingly difficult for schools to get funding in the first place because the teachers can't possibly measure up. So as you can see, the problems with NCLB far outweigh the benefits.
Now let's take a look at LEAP and what it strives to accomplish. This teaching philosophy has gotten increasing use and support in the university and even some primary education levels. The idea is to provide a liberal or very well rounded education to the individual and not just a narrow training.
This sounds like a good idea and it is in concept as well as in practice. It is actually the philosophy used here on Shepherd University. Through this system, a student will be able to not only pick the field of study they wish to pursue, but they will also receive education in other fields as well. This is a gerat way for students to get a feel of the world around them and allows them to get a taste of what else is out there for them. Through this system I have seen a student be set on one field of study and through a single class they took and enjoyed, completely change their major and be all the happier for it. This actually happened to me in my college experience. I was going for a pharmacy degree but through several liberal arts classes I was required to take, I ended up completely switching my major and becoming a mass communications major which is why I am currently writing this blog. I am personally grateful for this system and highly recommend it's use across the board.
However, there is one issue I have with this system. It requires that you take courses that you have no interest in whatsoever. For instance, as stated before I am a mass communications major and switched to this and plan on sticking with, therefore I have no desire or need for taking a physical education course. I understand that the purpose of this course is to help college students develop a healthy lifestyle but I am currently in shape and go to the gym regularly so the need for me to spend my time and my money in order to take this course just so i can further my education in my field of study is upsetting. I probably had the worst case scenario. The professor of the course was well into his 70's and would lose his train of thought halfway into a sentence and begin to ramble. His grading was sporadic and the course was confusing to say the least. needless to say I was highly upset that I had to spend money and time in the class in order to further my education.
As you can see, both of these entities are trying to improve the education of students everywhere. They succeed in some areas while failing in others. They are trying to achieve the same goal but going about it in a different way. As with all government or even just human policies, nothing is perfect, but we will continue to strive toward that mark.
What is media literacy really? When you look at the word you could just take it at it's suface meaning and asume one of several things. Is it the ability to read and interpret different forms of communication? Is it the ability to understand what a film is trying to communicate to the audience? Is it the ability of a person simply to know what media is?
The answer is yes to all these questions but it is also so much more. There are many facets to media literacy and would be difficult to describe in full detail every facet there is. So we must take a broader look at the subject and try to break it down into components that are easy to digest and understand.
There are many schools of thought on how to bring media literacy to the discussion table. Some believe that it is simply the ability to be aware of the media forces that surround us on an every day level. Others can see far deeper into the matter and bring out facets that have very little connection with the world around us. The fact of the matter is that no matter what school of thought you choose to follow, every one of them as got some grain of truth in what they are trying to say.
Media literacy is hard to define. So what I will attempt to do is simply bring up some broad points and observations about media literacy without going into tremendous detail about them. As stated before there are many ways to define it and even more ways to study it so a broad analysis is the best way to approach it.
One definition of media literacy is stated as being the ability to process and analyze the information presented to us everyday in entertainment, informative, and capital outlets. The basis is to try and ask questions and think critically about the media that is presented to us. We have the capability to go deeper into the advertisements and entertainment that we see everyday. Whether or not we do so is where media literacy comes into play.
There are several different ways that we can analyze these media outlets. Certainly we must take them into consideration because each way of looking at them will yield a different conclusion while looking at the exact same thing. One site has taken on the challenge of informing the world about media literacy in order to prepare us for living in a world where we are bombarded daily with media. The Center for Media Literacy has a very basic but very important way of educating on the topic. They have a four step process to understanding the media; Awareness, Analysis, Reflection, Action. This basically means to identify the information, analyze what it means, think of how it relates to you, and do what you deem best about this information.
These are all very critical ways of looking at media literacy and they are extensive. However, these are ways to view it from an academic and very scholarly view point. What about our culture and everyday level? How does it relate to me?
Well we can take that into consideration as well. When we are watching a movie or surfing the internet, try not to just be a sponge and soak up every drop of information highway road kill. Take a second and actually think about what is being put in front of your eyes. If we actually take the time to SEE what we're LOOKING at, we would discover that the world has got a lot more out there for us then just what our eyes are telling us.
Many of the things that are presented to us in the media don't even register on a conscious level. They are worked into our sleeping minds and our planted there and influence our thoughts and actions without us even knowing about it. This is where the everyday part comes in. We can't just sit there and let whatever the world wants to throw at us seep into our minds. We should regulate it and actually scrutinize what we allow ourselves to think about. Without the conscious thought about the media, we would all just become zombies and do whatever the talking heads tell us to do.
Media Studies can be a very scholarly and academic pursuit, but it should also be a personal issue for all of us. Without the media we wouldn't be the society we are today. Without media studies, we would all just be what society told us to be without exercising our free will.
Eating Jack Link's beef jerky will make you as legendary as sasquatch
When looking at a messin with sasquatch ad, one might notice several things about it and interpret it to be any number of different things from comedic to informative. Using the Frith Analysis, we are able to take a deeper look into what these things might be and what the advertiser is trying to communicate to us.
First of all would be the surface meaning or the quick glance analysis. When looking at the ad you will simply notice a sasquatch figure holding a bag of Jack Link's beef jerky while standing in the woods.
From the advertiser's intended meaning we have to take a slightly different approach. In the ad we see that this sasquatch is a wild and mythical creature and yet he is holding a bag of Jack Link's beef jerky. From this we can deduce that the advertiser is trying to get you to see that this product is as wild and mythical as sasquatch himself. The upside is that you can get your hands on this product and experience the wildness first hand.
Wildness of sasquatch is captured in this image
Finally we can look at the ad from an ideological and cultural point of view. From the television ads we can see that the guys that are eating the Jack Link's jerky are wild and fearless for picking on sasquatch who has been a symbol of campfire horror stories for years. We associate sasquatch with fables and legends and when we see this legendary creature being humiliated by men eating Jack Link's jerky, we associate their tenacity and bravado with the jerky. Conversely we are being shown that by getting this product, we will be brave, wild, and fearless.
The only problem is that by the end of the ad, sasquatch always has his revenge on his antagonists. However, in the mindsets of so many Americans, that still will not deter us from wanting to seek out this legendary creature and pop a paper bag behind his ear or making him smack himself in the face with shaving cream.
My favorite ad campaign has to be that of the Jack Links messin with Sasquatch ads. The success of putting a mythical creature into an ad campaign without having it come off as being cartoonish is amazing to me.
Though the sasquatch in the ads almost looks like a deformed Chewbacca, the overall look is pretty hilarious. Big Foot has been depicted several different ways in the past. From the super scary to the extremely comical. Trying to find a balance between the two that actually works must have been a challenge but they pulled it off rather well.
Jack Links got one of there biggest breaks from their partnership with the world poker series as a sponsor. Through this partnership, Jack Links got a lot recognition. From there they launched into a massive ad campaign and from there came the messin with sasquatch angle.
The ads are great and pretty funny. However, I don't quite get the connection between beef jerky and Big Foot. The only relationship I can see is that maybe Big Foot enjoys the meat and is a carnivore but they don't really portray him as being a predatory type. The specifics of the ads are lost on me but the overall effect is still pretty amusing.
Jack Links ads may not make perfect sense but their beef jerky is still delicious. I usually don't get it though because no matter how delicious they are, they are ridiculously expensive and I usually just get the generic brand. But don't tell sasquatch that.
There exists a list of the 12 most annoying pieces of technology. I agree with most of them on there. Technology for the sake of technology can be pretty ridiculous. Using technology just so that we can gets annoying when there are other ways to accomplish something that are far less annoying. The only thing that I don't agree with on the list has to be the "touchless bathrooms." Granted there are times when you can't get the sink to work, but there is usually more then one sink right next to each other so you simply need to move over. It cuts back on water consumption and germ spreading. Another of the
technologies that i don't really have a problem with is the voice recognition technology. I understand that there are those that get frustrated with it when they can't get the software to understand what they are saying. I personally don't have too much of a problem with it because I am a voice actor and have become accustomed to over enunciating my words. If you are having trouble with the voice recognition software then I suggest you speak slowly and ridiculously in order for the software to understand what you are saying. 
Another piece of technology I find incredibly annoying are the bluetooth ear pieces. When people go into a store and are shopping around, you will see them and it seems like they are talking to themselves. Often times I will walk by someone and they are looking in my direction while they are talking and then there will be that awkward moment when you're not sure if they are speaking to you or not. How lazy do you have to be to walk around a store and shop that you can't take the time to hold a phone to your ear for a few minutes. These wireless devices should only be used in a car where the situation requires you to use both of your hands. If you are too busy that you have to take a phone call during every moment of your life, then you need to take a step back and realize there is more to life then that.
Well first off we can't immediately start pointing fingers at Samsung and calling them evil for practices that they are not directly responsible for. The factories that they have their products constructed at are where these practices take place and it is up to the government to regulate the practices there. This does not exonerate Samsung however because they may have claimed to be unaware of these occurrences but once they found out they didn't take their business elsewhere either.
