What We Are To Advertisers
This article, though short, offered a world on insight into the minds of marketing executives and advertisers. It is a concise documentation of how we are looked at and categorized during this creative process. Advertisement is a way to spread the word to the masses about particular products. If you take a look around your local grocery store, you will see many wares that you are familiar with, along with the brand names that we have come to know (think Kleenex for facial tissue and Crest for toothpaste) Advertising, as I learned in this article, goes much deeper than just selling a product to the masses. Twitchell focuses on the subgroups that advertisers use to create and place their ads. Each and every one of us fits into what is called the “VALS” system, which categorizes consumers by buying habits. There are three main groups, along with eight sub-groups, all of which can be made into several combinations of buyer. This article I found to be mainly objective, in which there is more basic, logistical information given than total critique of the advertising/marketing industry. There was use of vocabulary (which was defined) along with charts to explain the different types of consumer. The main themes of the article were, “Mass production equals mass marketing equals creation of mass stereotypes” as well as “different products have different meanings to different audiences.” (pg.193) For example: Certain products, I just do not have any care about. Men’s Electric Shaving enhancer is an excellent example. For a certain audience, this ad is meaningful and the product might actually be of use. The specific ad I am thinking of features a middle aged man using this product and towards the end he is having his face stroked by an attractive woman with crimson fingernails. As a woman, I might buy this for my significant other, but for the single female there is simply no need to give two seconds thought or care. Thus, this ad would more likely be shown on a basic network channel or a more male-viewer dominated channel. (pg.193) going back to the ‘VALS’ system, this acronym stands for: Values and Lifestyles System (pg. 194). To advertisers, “Segmentation studies are crucial” (pg. 193) because they help streamline what varying groups see and hear about a product. In group number one, the Principle-Oriented Group, there are three categories. Actualizers, Fulfillers and Believers. Actualizers are generally out of the realm of marketing, for they have enough money that they can buy whatever they want, regardless of price. Fulfillers “support the status quo” and make purchases that are financially sound. Believers are generally conservative individuals with a strong sense of American pride (thus causing them to be drawn to American-made products). In the Status-Driven group, there are two types. Achievers and Strivers. Achievers are the “ideal consumer” for advertisers because they “buy to demonstrate success.” The final category is Participate-Driven consumers, and they include: Experiencers (those who live life on the edge and enjoy high-risk activities such as skiing, mountain climbing, fast cars, and the like), Makers and Strugglers. Twitchell noted that Actualizers and Strugglers were outside the glare of the glossy commercials and print ads, for one can already get anything they want and another simply does not have the means to buy such things. As I read this article, it made me think of the previous one I had read in Signs of Life in the U.S.A. The Parable of the Democracy of Goods. Advertisers have long focused on a few key groups, making average goods extraordinary (and those who purchase them like their wealthier peers.) This article also made me reflect on the commercials that I myself watched, and those which seem to be primarily for children, “macho men” (like those on Spike TV or ESPN) or women (Lifetime, Oxygen, E!) With each new channel, or magazine it is fairly obvious that there is a certain type of client to which the commercials or paper ad’s are intended for. I knew this was no accident, but I had no idea that there was literally a scale and model that was created specifically for this. I found this article to be enjoyable and informative, and as I sit down to watch the newest episode of Lost tonight, I will surely pay attention to which commercials I am being shown, and consider whom it was intended for and why that might be.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Kellogg’s All-Bran
Kellogg’s All-Bran J. Parker
Welcome to the world of (not so) subliminal messaging in advertising techniques. Today we’ll be focusing on ‘bran positioning’ in the media, and yes, the pun is intentional (if in poor taste), and not simply poor spelling skills. While most of marketing gurus today tend to use stimuli that impress upon our subconscious, Kellogg’s All-Bran has gone in the opposite direction with this television spot from 2007; in what I am hoping is an attempt to inject humor into this rather ‘uncomfortable’ topic!
http://www.mrbreakfast.com/cereal_theater.asp?videoid=2&id=6
Ah….constipation and irregularity! I’m unsure how this relates directly to the solid American worker (namely Joe Construction Worker) featured in this commercial, but then, I’m usually unsure why most advertisers do, well, what they do. I would encourage all viewers to begin taking a proactive look at what’s being ‘fed’ to us via the media.
The format of this ad is fairly basic…..it looks a bit ‘old school’ like a commercial layout from the 1990’s. The background is in muted brown tones (hmmmm), while the main character is wearing bright orange and a hardhat to get your attention.
In this spot, the character is running the monologue, but the background is the main focus. While he is telling us all how “sluggish” he felt, and he knew “something had to give”, steel I beam comes shooting out a hole behind him, complete with grunting noises from the other workers who are pulling it through the hole. Just wait…..we’re only warming up!
The target audience would appear to be male and middle aged. Also targeted, may be their wives. There they are, sitting at home in the evening, watching a little TV, and thinking “Wow! John is really irregular too….I bet All-Bran could ‘invigorate’ him! Let’s buy it!”
Emotionally this advert seems to be a fairly lighthearted one, about a serious topic. The humor is not brought right out into the foreground, so it is a secondary and subliminal ploy. Who knew that being irregular would ‘affect your work’ like that?
The composition itself involves what seems to be a very unsafe worksite….sparks flying, beams dropping, and ‘irregular’ workers, Oh My! He then speaks of being ‘invigorated’ by All-Bran while large steel barrels give the impression that they are falling out of his….ummm, behind.
The layout tends to have many things happening ‘behind’ poor Joe. The ending scene involves a large DUMP truck dropping its big, bulky load directly under Joe’s (tired and sore?) rump. Still feeling invigorated Joe?
The “10 days to a better you” of the All-Bran challenge are never actually discussed. What exactly is it? How does it ‘give you more energy’? How’s it work? Yet, they are still urging us to buy, eat and feel great!
I’m unsure if the most effective way to end an ad about a food that will effectively deal with your constipation issues, should be with “do it, feel it”, that’s not a visual that I want to be left with.
(497 words)
Welcome to the world of (not so) subliminal messaging in advertising techniques. Today we’ll be focusing on ‘bran positioning’ in the media, and yes, the pun is intentional (if in poor taste), and not simply poor spelling skills. While most of marketing gurus today tend to use stimuli that impress upon our subconscious, Kellogg’s All-Bran has gone in the opposite direction with this television spot from 2007; in what I am hoping is an attempt to inject humor into this rather ‘uncomfortable’ topic!
http://www.mrbreakfast.com/cereal_theater.asp?videoid=2&id=6
Ah….constipation and irregularity! I’m unsure how this relates directly to the solid American worker (namely Joe Construction Worker) featured in this commercial, but then, I’m usually unsure why most advertisers do, well, what they do. I would encourage all viewers to begin taking a proactive look at what’s being ‘fed’ to us via the media.
The format of this ad is fairly basic…..it looks a bit ‘old school’ like a commercial layout from the 1990’s. The background is in muted brown tones (hmmmm), while the main character is wearing bright orange and a hardhat to get your attention.
In this spot, the character is running the monologue, but the background is the main focus. While he is telling us all how “sluggish” he felt, and he knew “something had to give”, steel I beam comes shooting out a hole behind him, complete with grunting noises from the other workers who are pulling it through the hole. Just wait…..we’re only warming up!
The target audience would appear to be male and middle aged. Also targeted, may be their wives. There they are, sitting at home in the evening, watching a little TV, and thinking “Wow! John is really irregular too….I bet All-Bran could ‘invigorate’ him! Let’s buy it!”
Emotionally this advert seems to be a fairly lighthearted one, about a serious topic. The humor is not brought right out into the foreground, so it is a secondary and subliminal ploy. Who knew that being irregular would ‘affect your work’ like that?
The composition itself involves what seems to be a very unsafe worksite….sparks flying, beams dropping, and ‘irregular’ workers, Oh My! He then speaks of being ‘invigorated’ by All-Bran while large steel barrels give the impression that they are falling out of his….ummm, behind.
The layout tends to have many things happening ‘behind’ poor Joe. The ending scene involves a large DUMP truck dropping its big, bulky load directly under Joe’s (tired and sore?) rump. Still feeling invigorated Joe?
The “10 days to a better you” of the All-Bran challenge are never actually discussed. What exactly is it? How does it ‘give you more energy’? How’s it work? Yet, they are still urging us to buy, eat and feel great!
I’m unsure if the most effective way to end an ad about a food that will effectively deal with your constipation issues, should be with “do it, feel it”, that’s not a visual that I want to be left with.
(497 words)
Review of Bridgstone Tire
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNUWOu5BB
A silver car winds down the road, two cars on his tail. They pass an abandoned truck on the side of the road, its rusted shell seems to say, "There is no hope turn back." Then massive lights on the road ahead, the way has been blocked. The driver of the silver car quickly puts on the breaks. We are given a clean shot of the side of the car, and watch as the tires stop roaling as the silver car comes to a quick and controled stop. Four individuals walk forward, the leader takes a microphone and tells the driver of the silver car, "Here's the deal you Bridgestone tires or your life." The passenger side door opens and a woman is pushed out. She looks around as the silver car backs up and zooms away. "I said life not wife." the leader of the gang wines. As if hearing his complaint the silver car hanks farewell. Their prey lost the gang turns away saddened by the loss of good tires.
The breakdown. It's important to realize who this add is aimed at, mostly men. The two most odvious clues to this are the product and the time the add was first aired. The produck is a car part and cars are traditionaly the domian on men. The add was origionaly aired during the
SuperBowl in 2010. I would like to note that by throwing in a little laughter Bridgestone doesen't completly offend the women in the audience. Also the attitudes of the gang are nuteral toward the now helpless woman, so we dont see her as in any real danger.
The format and image of the add is overall dark and adverturous, the cars wind their chase through dark faraway reads, its night out and the rain is comming down. The first image of the silver car being chased is from the rear. We get a quick glimps of a car that has been altered in a Mad Max way. It tells us that we are in a dark post apocalyptic world. The rusted shell of a truck on the side of the road adds to this atmosphere. Then there is the road gang, they are the comic relif. Wearing tires around their waist oversized glasses. Two of the main gangmembers are so different is size its commical, one's the very big guy the other is the little neardy guy. Then there is the leader, he's English.
The emotional rise starts of as tnese but exciting as we follow the car chase, then when we arive and the roadblock and the English leader gives the punch line, we all get a little laugh. The "hero" drives off is his nice silver car and the gang are left with nothing but his old lady.
The audiences response, laughter. Tires are not something you buy everyday, but now that they have made you laugh, maby you or your old lady will rember them when it comes time to get a new set.
A silver car winds down the road, two cars on his tail. They pass an abandoned truck on the side of the road, its rusted shell seems to say, "There is no hope turn back." Then massive lights on the road ahead, the way has been blocked. The driver of the silver car quickly puts on the breaks. We are given a clean shot of the side of the car, and watch as the tires stop roaling as the silver car comes to a quick and controled stop. Four individuals walk forward, the leader takes a microphone and tells the driver of the silver car, "Here's the deal you Bridgestone tires or your life." The passenger side door opens and a woman is pushed out. She looks around as the silver car backs up and zooms away. "I said life not wife." the leader of the gang wines. As if hearing his complaint the silver car hanks farewell. Their prey lost the gang turns away saddened by the loss of good tires.
The breakdown. It's important to realize who this add is aimed at, mostly men. The two most odvious clues to this are the product and the time the add was first aired. The produck is a car part and cars are traditionaly the domian on men. The add was origionaly aired during the
SuperBowl in 2010. I would like to note that by throwing in a little laughter Bridgestone doesen't completly offend the women in the audience. Also the attitudes of the gang are nuteral toward the now helpless woman, so we dont see her as in any real danger.
The format and image of the add is overall dark and adverturous, the cars wind their chase through dark faraway reads, its night out and the rain is comming down. The first image of the silver car being chased is from the rear. We get a quick glimps of a car that has been altered in a Mad Max way. It tells us that we are in a dark post apocalyptic world. The rusted shell of a truck on the side of the road adds to this atmosphere. Then there is the road gang, they are the comic relif. Wearing tires around their waist oversized glasses. Two of the main gangmembers are so different is size its commical, one's the very big guy the other is the little neardy guy. Then there is the leader, he's English.
The emotional rise starts of as tnese but exciting as we follow the car chase, then when we arive and the roadblock and the English leader gives the punch line, we all get a little laugh. The "hero" drives off is his nice silver car and the gang are left with nothing but his old lady.
The audiences response, laughter. Tires are not something you buy everyday, but now that they have made you laugh, maby you or your old lady will rember them when it comes time to get a new set.
It is funny, isn't it
lucas W.
video post
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ew8hmVIGKcM
The start to the music video “Funny the Way It Is” by the Dave Matthews Band has us watch Dave begin to sing while wearing a goofy hat and glasses, sitting down at a breakfast table almost as if he were selling something. He then moves to the next scene with no help from the camera other than a simple pan left as he walks away and puts on a jacket, hat, and sunglasses, giving us an almost Sinatra star feel. Dave continues with tape on his face and magnifying glasses over his mouth and eyes, and then gets a brown liquid poured on him as he puts on an orange jump suit and a head bag. He comes out in a nice jacket with big sunglasses and starts dancing with the microphone during the guitar solo as if he were some pop star, walking over to some studio chairs he looks as if he is in an interview (the fake reality show camera man surrounding him helps with this), and finally he walks off and tears down the screen where a projector is playing old concerts of his band. (whew)
Similar to Eminem’s “We Made You”, the Dave Matthews Band made a video pointing out the ironies of life and doing so by showing the life of an American star in the process. He goes from selling a product to the high life of modeling (or partying) to plastic surgery to the inevitable asylum most stars must take from pressure (and more often than not drug or alcohol abuse) to being the big pop star to the reality star in an interview to walking away from it all. The intended audience would seem to be a mix, on one level his lyrics talk more to his fans or just to those who would listen (best exemplified with the lyric “somebody’s heart is broken and it becomes your favorite song”), but the video itself seems to send a message to the listeners as the comedy that comes in these ironies in life and also to maybe Hollywood, pointing out the ironies and crazy life that it can make for someone. He sells it best with the overall sense of sarcasm that he presents in the video singing with over an exaggerated face and silly outfits. The video also uses some bad camera angles and sometimes what appears to be a change in the speed, never making the video the most comfortable to take for face value and only driving home (in an oddly ironic way) how comfortable we can get with everything he presenting and singing about.
video post
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ew8hmVIGKcM
The start to the music video “Funny the Way It Is” by the Dave Matthews Band has us watch Dave begin to sing while wearing a goofy hat and glasses, sitting down at a breakfast table almost as if he were selling something. He then moves to the next scene with no help from the camera other than a simple pan left as he walks away and puts on a jacket, hat, and sunglasses, giving us an almost Sinatra star feel. Dave continues with tape on his face and magnifying glasses over his mouth and eyes, and then gets a brown liquid poured on him as he puts on an orange jump suit and a head bag. He comes out in a nice jacket with big sunglasses and starts dancing with the microphone during the guitar solo as if he were some pop star, walking over to some studio chairs he looks as if he is in an interview (the fake reality show camera man surrounding him helps with this), and finally he walks off and tears down the screen where a projector is playing old concerts of his band. (whew)
Similar to Eminem’s “We Made You”, the Dave Matthews Band made a video pointing out the ironies of life and doing so by showing the life of an American star in the process. He goes from selling a product to the high life of modeling (or partying) to plastic surgery to the inevitable asylum most stars must take from pressure (and more often than not drug or alcohol abuse) to being the big pop star to the reality star in an interview to walking away from it all. The intended audience would seem to be a mix, on one level his lyrics talk more to his fans or just to those who would listen (best exemplified with the lyric “somebody’s heart is broken and it becomes your favorite song”), but the video itself seems to send a message to the listeners as the comedy that comes in these ironies in life and also to maybe Hollywood, pointing out the ironies and crazy life that it can make for someone. He sells it best with the overall sense of sarcasm that he presents in the video singing with over an exaggerated face and silly outfits. The video also uses some bad camera angles and sometimes what appears to be a change in the speed, never making the video the most comfortable to take for face value and only driving home (in an oddly ironic way) how comfortable we can get with everything he presenting and singing about.
Video Text/ Pearl The Landlord
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/74/the-landlord-from-will-ferrell-and-adam-ghost-panther-mckay
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/4152/the-landlord-out-takes-from-will-ferrell-and-adam-ghost-panther-mckay?rel=prog_related&rel_pos=2
Pop culture being one of our biggest forms of entertainment, I thought it would be appropriate to play a short with one of today’s largest comedy figures. Will Farrel hits me 50/50 with his comedy. If he plays too much of an idiot I cannot stand him, but I will admit that he does have his moments. The role in this clip is perfect because it’s hardly about him, but the cute little girl playing the part of Pearl, his landlady.
The shock factor when watching this clip is quite high. One cannot help but wonder at the ability of a little girl that cannot be more than two reciting lines that are quite strong for one of this tender age. The scene plays out as titled, at will Farrel’s apartment. There’s a knock at the door, and mysteriously Will knows that it’s his landlady… strange. But he sets the scene up for immediate hostility. He’s nervous about what his landlady will want, the rent money. He opens the door and behold there is a two year old girl demanding rent money.
This little girl is so cute that one cannot help but be shocked by the fact that she is yelling about rent money. “You pay now, bitch,” I have seen the extra clip and I know that her parents were right there coaching her these lines. Her father was the friend in the beginning of the clip with Will. One wonders if this is appropriate teaching your little girl these lines. Perhaps our generation has degraded so far that we have to resort to two year olds being vulgar to humor us. Whatever the case I really rather enjoy the shock factor that this piece has.
The scene continues on with the demanding of rent. Pearl threatens Will with eviction if he does not pay up, she might even go as far as smacking him. Will pleads for more time; try’s to make a bargain. Pearl continues to insult him, and will tells her she needs to relax. We do often say such things in confrontations, and the silly thing is they only seem to elevate the situations we’re in. One thing I found hilarious was that this girl calls him an “asshole,” and “bitch,” demonstrating what most parents would frown upon as a potty mouth. But is it really so much better that we use the language ourselves? Adults seldom demonstrate appropriate behavior for their children, so it’s no wonder they develop habits of older generations at younger ages. This is “maturing,” before truly maturing.
In true fashion to adult confrontation, we find that Pearl has a drinking problem. “I need to get my drink on.” This demonstrates Pearl’s true desire for the rent money. Will quickly lets her know that this is a problem, and that the situation needs to be resolved at a later date. This video strikes me because it demonstrates common adult behavior in a not unusual manner and setting. But one of the adult positions is replaced with a precious two year old girl, making what might strike one as a usual situation, very different.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/4152/the-landlord-out-takes-from-will-ferrell-and-adam-ghost-panther-mckay?rel=prog_related&rel_pos=2
Pop culture being one of our biggest forms of entertainment, I thought it would be appropriate to play a short with one of today’s largest comedy figures. Will Farrel hits me 50/50 with his comedy. If he plays too much of an idiot I cannot stand him, but I will admit that he does have his moments. The role in this clip is perfect because it’s hardly about him, but the cute little girl playing the part of Pearl, his landlady.
The shock factor when watching this clip is quite high. One cannot help but wonder at the ability of a little girl that cannot be more than two reciting lines that are quite strong for one of this tender age. The scene plays out as titled, at will Farrel’s apartment. There’s a knock at the door, and mysteriously Will knows that it’s his landlady… strange. But he sets the scene up for immediate hostility. He’s nervous about what his landlady will want, the rent money. He opens the door and behold there is a two year old girl demanding rent money.
This little girl is so cute that one cannot help but be shocked by the fact that she is yelling about rent money. “You pay now, bitch,” I have seen the extra clip and I know that her parents were right there coaching her these lines. Her father was the friend in the beginning of the clip with Will. One wonders if this is appropriate teaching your little girl these lines. Perhaps our generation has degraded so far that we have to resort to two year olds being vulgar to humor us. Whatever the case I really rather enjoy the shock factor that this piece has.
The scene continues on with the demanding of rent. Pearl threatens Will with eviction if he does not pay up, she might even go as far as smacking him. Will pleads for more time; try’s to make a bargain. Pearl continues to insult him, and will tells her she needs to relax. We do often say such things in confrontations, and the silly thing is they only seem to elevate the situations we’re in. One thing I found hilarious was that this girl calls him an “asshole,” and “bitch,” demonstrating what most parents would frown upon as a potty mouth. But is it really so much better that we use the language ourselves? Adults seldom demonstrate appropriate behavior for their children, so it’s no wonder they develop habits of older generations at younger ages. This is “maturing,” before truly maturing.
In true fashion to adult confrontation, we find that Pearl has a drinking problem. “I need to get my drink on.” This demonstrates Pearl’s true desire for the rent money. Will quickly lets her know that this is a problem, and that the situation needs to be resolved at a later date. This video strikes me because it demonstrates common adult behavior in a not unusual manner and setting. But one of the adult positions is replaced with a precious two year old girl, making what might strike one as a usual situation, very different.
Roland Merchand- The Parable of the Democracy of Goods
I liked this essay because i felt i could relate. It made me think and analyze the ads that i see all the time and ussually don't bat an eye at. The Parable of the Democracy of Goods is reffering to the idea that all products can be used by anyone. The greatness of modern mass production allowed everyone to enjoy the "society's most significant pleasure, convenience, or benefit". He mostly reffers to ads between 1920 and 1940. The main pattern that i notice was that all the ads depicted or explained a wealthy family using a product and then a note saying that all families can enjoy the same product. For example, one ad he explained was about a wealthy family was feeding their child Cream of Wheat and then explaining how not even the filthy rich could buy a better breakfast for their child. This idea would make people think that "well if THEY are feeding their child that and their rich i should too". This idea only works because we view the rich as living in luxury and would like to live like them, and if they are using a product we should be too.
Merchand also explains the opposite idea of the Democracy of Afflictions. This idea expressed that it does not matter who you are because we are all the same. This was attemping to relate to everyone by no setting a target market. An example Merchand uses is a soap company saying that no one is safe from B.O. no matter who you are. Another way of explaining the Democracy of Afflictions is that its a mode to remind mindless readers that no one was safe from a specific threat or danger that a certain product they were advertising could prevent. So first they remind you that you are not safe no matter who you are and then offer up their product to protect oneself.
Another way the Democracy of Goods was present in society was comparing to the past. Historical comparisons were made to make ones present situation seem better. "No monarch in all history ever saw the day he could have half as much as you." was presented by Paramount Pictures and is a great example of the Democracy of Goods. The prices of many products were lowered from mass production allowing people to buy product formally only availiable to the rich. This makes people feel important and part of the elite in our society. So really what it comes down to is that the feeling we get out of buying a product and the statment made about ones status by buying that product.
James B. Twitchell/ "What We Are to Advertisers"
We all consume, some of us more than others. American culture can easily be seen as the epitome of consumerism, and Mr. Twitchell demonstrates how we are viewed by those who wish to sell us. I was slightly surprised Twitchell didn’t go all out and compare consumerism to all of the Wild Kingdom. “Birds of a feather flock together,” Twitchell uses this common mannerism as if birds can easily be baited into developing a habit, continually coming back to a source for more. This vision he plants with animal characteristics, was a wonder to me that he did not come out and call advertisers vultures or some other raptor. They circle their prey, using groups like the “SRI” to collect data and f ind out more about their victims. When they are ready they swoop.
I enjoyed Twichell’s breakdown of consumers, from “Actualizers who essential know the difference between need and want. And Strugglers who have next to nothing, and have a long ways to go, if they manage to get out of the cycle of poverty. Whilst breaking each group down Twitchell pays homage to most everyone’s status symbol, the car. When one looks at another’s car, one typically automatically sizes them up based on today’s status symbol. From the dents on the outside, the cleanliness inside, the sound system, the rims, and most of all the make and model of the vehicle. Whether it’s a fully restored 1963 fire engine red Stingray Corvette, a BMW, a Mercedes, souped up Honda Civic, or a plain clunker, though shall be judged. As I was stating, it’s a status symbol that people base what kind of person you are, what kind of money you have, and how you fit into today’s society. Because it is such a huge status symbol, its no wonder that vehicles are one of the most prevalent, and largest marketing enterprises globally. In Bellingham we have almost an entire road dedicated to the sale of cars.
As I scramble to organize my thoughts after another exhausting week, one realizes that consumerism is in large part about what we have. Its either who has the biggest, strongest, fastest, or sleekest, trimmest and sexiest. That’s a whole lot of est. “Strugglers” struck me as wannabe’s that just want to make it into that group that have all those things. They want the look at least while they work their way up “even leasing a BMW” as Twitchell puts it. This would be a key group for advertisers who obviously want to focus on the materialistic group that always wants more than they have. In contrast “Actualizers” appear to be the level headed individuals who know the difference between a want and a need. They have no desire to run out and buy the best, because they are comfortable where they are. When they do go get the best it will be on their time.
Monday, April 26, 2010
iPhone ad-There's an app for that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hny-G-0nUBM&feature=youtube_gdata
Everything is at the tips of your fingers, in one small hand held electronic device. It allows you to go online, download apps, look up the weather, and get directions; anything you could possibly “need” lays within the palm of your hand. In this advertisement, they show little detail but send a big message. It simply shows the iPhone, displaying different features following with the saying, “there’s an app for that.” The advertisement is saying that anything you could possibly need or want is right in front of you, you don’t have to go on a computer or print out anything; it’s all in one device. It’s a hit with many people, because it’s a direct and easy way for communication, information, and even education. Americans tend to be known for their laziness and need for instant gratification, and what better way to sell that than through the latest technology at a costly price? People will spend hundreds of dollars for instant access and to have the latest fad, because desktops and flip phones were “so last year”. Apple targets any age, race, gender, or background, and if they don’t, I’m sure they’ll “make an app” for it. The commercial ends by saying, “the iPhone: solving life’s dilemmas, one app at a time.” As ridiculous as it sounds, millions of us buy into it because they believe that the iPhone really will solve all of our problems and make our lives that much simpler…if only it was that easy right? The intended audience is really anyone who will buy it or can afford it. In the advertisement, the background is all white, and the iPhone takes up the majority of the screen, emphasizing directly on its “beauty” it has to us, as consumers. The advertisement definitely calls for a response, suggesting you to buy the product. It claims that it will be a good investment, though it doesn’t mention the high prices or the potential glitches, just the significance and relevance it has to our lives. If we were to take a poll of iPhone owners, vs. “other phone” owners, would they really be that much more happy with their lives than the ‘rest of us’? Truth be told, we will buy whatever catches our eye and keeps us updated with the latest social tendencies. This leads me to wonder, do we buy these types of products to benefit our lives or to satisfy everyone else’s outlook on our own?
Everything is at the tips of your fingers, in one small hand held electronic device. It allows you to go online, download apps, look up the weather, and get directions; anything you could possibly “need” lays within the palm of your hand. In this advertisement, they show little detail but send a big message. It simply shows the iPhone, displaying different features following with the saying, “there’s an app for that.” The advertisement is saying that anything you could possibly need or want is right in front of you, you don’t have to go on a computer or print out anything; it’s all in one device. It’s a hit with many people, because it’s a direct and easy way for communication, information, and even education. Americans tend to be known for their laziness and need for instant gratification, and what better way to sell that than through the latest technology at a costly price? People will spend hundreds of dollars for instant access and to have the latest fad, because desktops and flip phones were “so last year”. Apple targets any age, race, gender, or background, and if they don’t, I’m sure they’ll “make an app” for it. The commercial ends by saying, “the iPhone: solving life’s dilemmas, one app at a time.” As ridiculous as it sounds, millions of us buy into it because they believe that the iPhone really will solve all of our problems and make our lives that much simpler…if only it was that easy right? The intended audience is really anyone who will buy it or can afford it. In the advertisement, the background is all white, and the iPhone takes up the majority of the screen, emphasizing directly on its “beauty” it has to us, as consumers. The advertisement definitely calls for a response, suggesting you to buy the product. It claims that it will be a good investment, though it doesn’t mention the high prices or the potential glitches, just the significance and relevance it has to our lives. If we were to take a poll of iPhone owners, vs. “other phone” owners, would they really be that much more happy with their lives than the ‘rest of us’? Truth be told, we will buy whatever catches our eye and keeps us updated with the latest social tendencies. This leads me to wonder, do we buy these types of products to benefit our lives or to satisfy everyone else’s outlook on our own?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rsEnwKrsvc
The advertisement for Doritos starts off with a guy picking up a girl for a date. She welcomes him into her home and introduces him to her son while she steps out of the room for a minute. The guy talks to the son and picks up a Dorito. The son slaps him across the face and says, “Keep your hands off my Mama, and keep your hands off my Doritos!” This funny commercial is mostly for entertainment and laughter, but does this advertisement have a deeper meaning than jut for laughs? Is it trying to get you to the feeling of protection and hoarding? I believe the commercial is saying that Doritos are so good that you don’t want to share them, and are in top priority for things that you want to protect, like your “mama”, because they are so delicious. It is also saying that you want to hoard all the good stuff for yourself, as a selfish act.
The advertisement is not screaming at you how good their product is. And it isn’t directly telling you to buy it. It is subtly hidden with the aspect that the kid doesn’t want to share them because it is that good. Which is a different marketing technique. Most commercials these days will tell you how good their product is and compare it to other similar products making theirs seem superior over the competitor product. They also don’t tell you much about it. It just says don’t touch my Doritos. This is sort of a hidden message in a sense because it is not directly telling you how good the product is, you just assume that it is good making you want to buy the product.
Commercial Comprehension
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5461u_9X93A&NR=1
In the commercial that I have chosen to post starts with a guy who looks not very happy in a very warm and cuddly looking bear costume. He rings the doorbell and this girl answers the door as the bear holding a few pink balloons starts to sing a valentines song from her bf. He goes on saying on how her boyfriend has something to say, that she is costing him a lot of money because she is not in his cellular phone network, so he is going to break up with her today. She looks very shocked and says "I cant believe this" and he responds "Want me to sing it again?" The thing that is trying to be sold here is a T-Mobile phone service were you can have unlimited calling to people that are in your network so it will not cost you a fortune. This commercial itself is representing a couple on valentines day. It isn’t all over done and lovey dovey but that is because of what is going to happen at the end of the commercial but this commercial does not show the boyfriend it just shows the guy he hired to sing this song to his girlfriend at her door on valentines day. The thing that works for this commercial is that it could work for virtually almost anybody that has a phone and it could be potentially something that actually really does hurt couples out there that are not together all the time and just want to talk to each other throughout the day here and there. Which all in all is just saying if you want to save a few dollars maybe this is the way to do it by switching to our network. There are a few things here that I think are kind of cultural myths in this video. The marketers here are trying to take something that could be really sad and ugly and make it into something that is just sad and doing it in a way that no one would ever expect. We want this commercial to work because if we ever have to break up with someone we don’t want it to be anymore harder then it already is, we don’t want to stress more and more about something that we have already been stressed out about. It is sometimes hard to break up with someone so he is having it done through a way that makes the guy in the bear suit seem all cuddly but in reality he is trying to just be done with her since he doesn’t want to pay anymore in phone bills. In the very end all this commercial is trying to say is, "Join our network so that you don’t have to run up a cellular bill talking to loved ones or significant others."
In the commercial that I have chosen to post starts with a guy who looks not very happy in a very warm and cuddly looking bear costume. He rings the doorbell and this girl answers the door as the bear holding a few pink balloons starts to sing a valentines song from her bf. He goes on saying on how her boyfriend has something to say, that she is costing him a lot of money because she is not in his cellular phone network, so he is going to break up with her today. She looks very shocked and says "I cant believe this" and he responds "Want me to sing it again?" The thing that is trying to be sold here is a T-Mobile phone service were you can have unlimited calling to people that are in your network so it will not cost you a fortune. This commercial itself is representing a couple on valentines day. It isn’t all over done and lovey dovey but that is because of what is going to happen at the end of the commercial but this commercial does not show the boyfriend it just shows the guy he hired to sing this song to his girlfriend at her door on valentines day. The thing that works for this commercial is that it could work for virtually almost anybody that has a phone and it could be potentially something that actually really does hurt couples out there that are not together all the time and just want to talk to each other throughout the day here and there. Which all in all is just saying if you want to save a few dollars maybe this is the way to do it by switching to our network. There are a few things here that I think are kind of cultural myths in this video. The marketers here are trying to take something that could be really sad and ugly and make it into something that is just sad and doing it in a way that no one would ever expect. We want this commercial to work because if we ever have to break up with someone we don’t want it to be anymore harder then it already is, we don’t want to stress more and more about something that we have already been stressed out about. It is sometimes hard to break up with someone so he is having it done through a way that makes the guy in the bear suit seem all cuddly but in reality he is trying to just be done with her since he doesn’t want to pay anymore in phone bills. In the very end all this commercial is trying to say is, "Join our network so that you don’t have to run up a cellular bill talking to loved ones or significant others."
"Old Spice" Love it or Hate It
http://www.youtube.com/user/oldspice?v=s1l4wRt7TJ8&feature=pyv&ad=3465578987&kw=old%20spice%20commercial&gclid=CLmu0ujCpaECFRNFgwodfkaCEg
Old Spice is still around today even after many old products have vanished. But why is it still on television all the time and still in stores when so many people think that it is such an old man’s scent? Someone must still be buying it. Old Spice must be doing something right! Sometimes it is hard to escape the strong opinions towards a product, no matter how well it is advertised. People cannot break away and imagine it to be anything else. In the old spice television advertisement, we follow a young attractive man doing superhero feats to impress his woman .Everyone loves a good superhero (even Spiderman and Batman have created new movies that continue to win over the hearts of the public.) The advertisers rely on this knowledge to capture the audience. The advertisement starts with the young man at the gym, then it shows him being fitted for a nice suit and then preparing a nice dinner for a beautiful woman, all of which he does with ease. This ad appeals to the young men of America and it relies on humor to capture the attention of the audience by exaggerating how the man can do everything perfectly. The theme song that accompanies the advertisement is very upbeat and many people cannot get it out of their head after listening to it. The focus of the advertisement is the young man. As the viewer watches the man go through the themes of his life, they are captivated by how he keeps up with it all. With such a hectic life, surely this man must be wearing a good deodorant to keep him smelling fresh? And he is. He is wearing Old Spice. It has been said that there is nothing sexy about a man wearing Old Spice, myth or not, many people of the older generation cannot get the association between Old Spice and old men out of their head. The advertisers are aware of this, so they have made their commercial fun and upbeat in order to appeal to the younger generation that may not be aware of the stigma attached to this product. Although many of the older generation will not be tempted to give old spice another chance, it does however appeal to the younger market. Due to constant new advertisements, it has kept the name out there and people talking about it, which is a very important part of advertising. The more extreme the advertisement is, the more it will be talked about in the classroom, home, or between friends. Even though many people would not admit to having Old Spice in the house, we are still aware of the product and are intrigued by Old Spice Advertisements.
Old Spice is still around today even after many old products have vanished. But why is it still on television all the time and still in stores when so many people think that it is such an old man’s scent? Someone must still be buying it. Old Spice must be doing something right! Sometimes it is hard to escape the strong opinions towards a product, no matter how well it is advertised. People cannot break away and imagine it to be anything else. In the old spice television advertisement, we follow a young attractive man doing superhero feats to impress his woman .Everyone loves a good superhero (even Spiderman and Batman have created new movies that continue to win over the hearts of the public.) The advertisers rely on this knowledge to capture the audience. The advertisement starts with the young man at the gym, then it shows him being fitted for a nice suit and then preparing a nice dinner for a beautiful woman, all of which he does with ease. This ad appeals to the young men of America and it relies on humor to capture the attention of the audience by exaggerating how the man can do everything perfectly. The theme song that accompanies the advertisement is very upbeat and many people cannot get it out of their head after listening to it. The focus of the advertisement is the young man. As the viewer watches the man go through the themes of his life, they are captivated by how he keeps up with it all. With such a hectic life, surely this man must be wearing a good deodorant to keep him smelling fresh? And he is. He is wearing Old Spice. It has been said that there is nothing sexy about a man wearing Old Spice, myth or not, many people of the older generation cannot get the association between Old Spice and old men out of their head. The advertisers are aware of this, so they have made their commercial fun and upbeat in order to appeal to the younger generation that may not be aware of the stigma attached to this product. Although many of the older generation will not be tempted to give old spice another chance, it does however appeal to the younger market. Due to constant new advertisements, it has kept the name out there and people talking about it, which is a very important part of advertising. The more extreme the advertisement is, the more it will be talked about in the classroom, home, or between friends. Even though many people would not admit to having Old Spice in the house, we are still aware of the product and are intrigued by Old Spice Advertisements.
“Inspired by Horses® - DVD Preview” (blog post)
“Have you ever dreamed of a greater relationship with your horse, one where the bond you share is stronger than any lead rope, and your horse wants to be with you as much as you want to be with them?” (Video txt) Sounds good to me, how do I sign up? Well according to this commercial all I may need to do is watch this DVD and try these techniques. So why, you may ask would I want a deeper connection between me and my horse? Well I would want a deeper connection because I want my horse to trust me and to want to be with me as much as I want to be with it.
Jonathan Field is a highly regarded horsemanship specialist and clinician. He teaches the person then, the horse. Because what good is it if the horse knows the signals or cues to do things and the rider doesn’t know what signals to give or how to give them. Oh, and did I forget to mention that he’s Canadian. To some people in the horse world he is a horsemanship God.
This video text or YouTube commercial is geared towards people who want a stronger bond between themselves and their horses. It seems to be aimed more toward women than men but I can’t explain why. The video is of a man working with his horses in different ways. The man (Jonathan Field) works with his horses Hal and Quincy. In some clips they’re in the field and Jonathan is riding bareback and in other clips he is working in the arena playing games with his horses. This commercial conveys the emotion of being easy going and having fun with horses. I myself am trying to learn how to work with my horses at liberty. Meaning that I want to be able to work with my horses without tack (a saddle on the back or a bridle on the head) I would like to be able to play with my horses and have them follow me around with out a lead rope.
So if having a stronger relationship with your horses is your goal then I’d suggest talking with Jonathan Field or watching his DVD’s. Always keep working with your horses, have fun and stay safe with a helmet or ridding vest. Jonathan Field has clinics and has other DVD’s out there for you to choose from. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqZYfxAsQhI
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Reception?
When most people visualize the return from war, they see loved ones holding signs, crowds clapping and a CD player echoing “Proud to be an American”. In Veteran Support – Alone 60 we are given a home coming completely opposite to the norm. It is an empty world occupied by one service member. He wonders through an airport, train station and the cityscape in solitude. He carries on in silence and expressionless with all he needs on his shoulders. The sterile environment is finally broken by someone else. A young man brandishing a high and tight haircut and a shirt that gives away his profession approaches the service member. After a hand shake and “welcome home”, emotion finally finds itself on the soldiers face. The dream is over and the world comes back to life as the two men move on.
It is a powerful message which presents another side of the return from war. It chronicles the difficulties involved in moving from harms way to the safe confines of society. You can see the isolation of the young man as he moves through an apparently empty world. This is puzzling because most people would see it as a moment of personal celebration. They might be a little disappointed in the stoic reaction presented by the one returning to safety. It is difficult to understand until the end.
We have another man who breaks the barrier. Filling in the gaps, we understand that he is also in the service of his country. We can also assume that the only reason he was effective here is that he already knows what the other man is going through. This makes it evident that there is a brotherhood between the two which goes beyond branch affiliation. Typically, there is animosity between the Marine Corp and the Army. There is no rivalry because something deeper is present, the brotherhood of war. It is by this brotherhood that the Marine is able to help in the Soldiers return.
It is an amazing story with two audiences in mind. First is for the person coming home. The world isn’t the same anymore. They have seen thing that will go with them for the rest of their lives. It is a heavy burden and can be overwhelming, particularly upon arrival. It doesn’t have to be alone though. The point of the video is that you are not alone and that together the felling of solitude can be overcome. The other audience is the public. Many people don’t see the isolation that a service member is subjected too after coming back. It is not from the outside like in previous conflicts, it is from within. The purpose is to show the public the piece of war that comes with you.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
On Reading a Video Text
Lucas W.
On Reading a Video Text
Robert Scholes begins his article “On Reading a Video Text” by quickly jumping into what “video text”, as the “reader” of said text, gives us. It gives us a certain kind of power, says Scholes, the kind of power that makes us feel in control of what we see. You see, unlike Scholes’ article with its masterful use of language and ability to deploy socially historical contexts in such a casual way (i.e. when referencing the novel for bourgeois society, otherwise known as the Bolshevik revolution), when reading a video text we simply visualize what is between the lines based on cultural references and/or values. And maybe he uses the higher language to drive home his point about visual text, the point in which he makes all too clear to me when he makes the idea of reading a video text easier for us to accomplish with such accuracy and power over what we see, easier than say….reading his article, which requires a little more dissection, mastery, and meta-knowledge of the English language than just a primary discourse in our culture.
Scholes continues his article describing the power that the video text has over the narrative form, stating that narrativity is “the pleasures and powers associated with the reception of stories presented in video texts” (?). He also goes into the power of cultural reinforcement and how simply by interpreting a video text through simple cultural cues and references our own cultural identity is reinforced as being part of a greater whole. Scholes the proceeds to use some of those historic references to show how the video text is changing the course of textual literacy and pulling so far away from normalcy, such as “What the epic poem did for ancient cultures, the romance for feudalism, and the novel for bourgeois society”.
Scholes then describes this process of narrativity, of cultural reinforcement by going through the layers of a budweiser commercial that we as Americans can all connect, relate to, and easily read between the lines I order to finish the fairy tale that is being “American”. Simply by drawing on what we have attained in our cultural upbringing it is easy for us to believe what the commercial represents, even if on an unconscious level for most of what we absorb. Scholes ends his article describing how these complexities can stand so easily in simple symbols, whether or not the beer is sold (if you believe in America, then the idea worked for Budweiser) the symbols we put together for our visual texts makes them easier to digest, despite the complexities involved.
On Reading a Video Text
Robert Scholes begins his article “On Reading a Video Text” by quickly jumping into what “video text”, as the “reader” of said text, gives us. It gives us a certain kind of power, says Scholes, the kind of power that makes us feel in control of what we see. You see, unlike Scholes’ article with its masterful use of language and ability to deploy socially historical contexts in such a casual way (i.e. when referencing the novel for bourgeois society, otherwise known as the Bolshevik revolution), when reading a video text we simply visualize what is between the lines based on cultural references and/or values. And maybe he uses the higher language to drive home his point about visual text, the point in which he makes all too clear to me when he makes the idea of reading a video text easier for us to accomplish with such accuracy and power over what we see, easier than say….reading his article, which requires a little more dissection, mastery, and meta-knowledge of the English language than just a primary discourse in our culture.
Scholes continues his article describing the power that the video text has over the narrative form, stating that narrativity is “the pleasures and powers associated with the reception of stories presented in video texts” (?). He also goes into the power of cultural reinforcement and how simply by interpreting a video text through simple cultural cues and references our own cultural identity is reinforced as being part of a greater whole. Scholes the proceeds to use some of those historic references to show how the video text is changing the course of textual literacy and pulling so far away from normalcy, such as “What the epic poem did for ancient cultures, the romance for feudalism, and the novel for bourgeois society”.
Scholes then describes this process of narrativity, of cultural reinforcement by going through the layers of a budweiser commercial that we as Americans can all connect, relate to, and easily read between the lines I order to finish the fairy tale that is being “American”. Simply by drawing on what we have attained in our cultural upbringing it is easy for us to believe what the commercial represents, even if on an unconscious level for most of what we absorb. Scholes ends his article describing how these complexities can stand so easily in simple symbols, whether or not the beer is sold (if you believe in America, then the idea worked for Budweiser) the symbols we put together for our visual texts makes them easier to digest, despite the complexities involved.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Brought to You Buy
I had to tear myself away from the Home Shopping Network to begin this blog, it's Health and Fitness hour, and I am once again convinced that if I plunk down a measly $119 (free shipping and handling for the next 30 minutes!) that I will soon be slim, and sexy and possibly even younger! (It's amazing! it's a breakthrough! It will CHANGE MY LIFE!!!) Ah...the amazing power of advertising! Come latest fitness gadget, and join the others, sitting in their very own room, awaiting use while I peruse the infomercials for more (more...MORE!)
A TV ad featuring smiling bears selling the softest toilet tissue. Dogs drinking beer to make their masters the life of the party., and scantily clad women who have me convinced that if I purchase this scent, I too will become irresistible and alluring to all I encounter (Signs of Life 1-2)!
None of these seem to make any logical sense, yet appeal to us subconciously in a way meant to play upon our deepest dears, our base emotions, and our most private yearnings. How is it these marketing geniuses can take these seemingly incongruous items and convince us that by purchasing them we will become better, sexier, happier...yet with no obviuos link at all?
I highly doubt that Viagra will not only improve my golf game, but ensure my ownership of an amazing pleasure yacht skippered by a much younger beauty. Or that Cover Girl will truly turn me into someone who is "easy, breezy, beautiful" (Cover Girl campaign)... yet we buy, and we buy a lot. We're bombarded with images that remind us that for us ordinary Joes to be worth something, we must strive to become part of the elitist crowd, through consumerism of course! Our children are convinced that in order for them to be worth something, they need to drink Coke (says the gyrating, barely dressed young beauty), listen to Tech 9 (says the very COOL gangsta' dude), and trade in those passe DC shores for some brand new Osirises so that you can become the next winner on America's Best Dance Crew.
Advertising tricks are constantly changing to keep up with society's ideals. While in the 1920's we all wanted to step up the 'class ladder' (179) , and so advertisers aimed to target that inferiority complex by convincing buyers that they too could be just like the 'Joneses' if they would only buy "X" brand of coffee, or "Y" brand of vacuum cleaner. WOW! Who knew it was that simple! Where do I sign?
By the 1950's the nuclear family was an ideal, and all you had to do was eat your cornflakes and BINGO! "Dad, mom and the two kids all live happily together in the suburbs. Dad goes out to work and mom stays home to look after the children" .... ahhh bliss (weburbanist.com). Pass the box please?
Now we trot ahead a few decades to the opulence of the 80's. Reganomics reigned, and oil was king. Everyone wants everything, and wants it now! Women were portrayed as powerful, and more advertising was aimed towards them as they now worked away form home and spent more money than men did on household items. The dishwasher with the delay cycle, the crock-pot, the 'sexy' family car, all marketed to appeal to women who had more money than time. Forget the cuddly teddy bears; show us the real BIG cars (so all my hair can fit inside).
Now we move forward again, and we've changed. Oh how we've changed! Constantly inundating us with graphic images, violence and crass humor, these ads have become almost shocking in their attempt to get the job done. The next generation of young men seem to enjoy visual depictions of young women in powerless or humiliating situations, hare-brained and asking to be abused (174). Should this really be an image that sells men's body spray? It does. Not only to the 20 somethings, but to the 10 year olds seeking to emulate their older role models.
It hasn't improved much for the women either. One would think that advertisments aimed at us to accept ourselves as naturally beautiful, would be less about, uh... beauty. These ads feature many different cultures of women selling cosmetics (why, if we're already beautiful?), or soap, or perfume. But I've yet to see a hunchbacked, one-eyed toothless woman touted as a 'natural beauty' in an ad for anything. And still physical beauty is overshadowed by any type of mental prowess. Do you see any female nuclear physicists or State Senators in Revlon commercials? Unfortunately, "intelligence, if it is acknowledged at all, is secondary, with beauty being primary" (175).
So please keep your eyes and minds open. Think, ask, analyze...go deeper. Don't just buy into the mindless babble and clutter pulsating from your computer and television. What is the seller trying to get from you (besides you cold hard cash and feelings of inadequacy)? And please, don't get sucked into the vortex of 'gotta have it' so deeply that you must buy a larger house to simply have room for all of those fitness gadgets!
A TV ad featuring smiling bears selling the softest toilet tissue. Dogs drinking beer to make their masters the life of the party., and scantily clad women who have me convinced that if I purchase this scent, I too will become irresistible and alluring to all I encounter (Signs of Life 1-2)!
None of these seem to make any logical sense, yet appeal to us subconciously in a way meant to play upon our deepest dears, our base emotions, and our most private yearnings. How is it these marketing geniuses can take these seemingly incongruous items and convince us that by purchasing them we will become better, sexier, happier...yet with no obviuos link at all?
I highly doubt that Viagra will not only improve my golf game, but ensure my ownership of an amazing pleasure yacht skippered by a much younger beauty. Or that Cover Girl will truly turn me into someone who is "easy, breezy, beautiful" (Cover Girl campaign)... yet we buy, and we buy a lot. We're bombarded with images that remind us that for us ordinary Joes to be worth something, we must strive to become part of the elitist crowd, through consumerism of course! Our children are convinced that in order for them to be worth something, they need to drink Coke (says the gyrating, barely dressed young beauty), listen to Tech 9 (says the very COOL gangsta' dude), and trade in those passe DC shores for some brand new Osirises so that you can become the next winner on America's Best Dance Crew.
Advertising tricks are constantly changing to keep up with society's ideals. While in the 1920's we all wanted to step up the 'class ladder' (179) , and so advertisers aimed to target that inferiority complex by convincing buyers that they too could be just like the 'Joneses' if they would only buy "X" brand of coffee, or "Y" brand of vacuum cleaner. WOW! Who knew it was that simple! Where do I sign?
By the 1950's the nuclear family was an ideal, and all you had to do was eat your cornflakes and BINGO! "Dad, mom and the two kids all live happily together in the suburbs. Dad goes out to work and mom stays home to look after the children" .... ahhh bliss (weburbanist.com). Pass the box please?
Now we trot ahead a few decades to the opulence of the 80's. Reganomics reigned, and oil was king. Everyone wants everything, and wants it now! Women were portrayed as powerful, and more advertising was aimed towards them as they now worked away form home and spent more money than men did on household items. The dishwasher with the delay cycle, the crock-pot, the 'sexy' family car, all marketed to appeal to women who had more money than time. Forget the cuddly teddy bears; show us the real BIG cars (so all my hair can fit inside).
Now we move forward again, and we've changed. Oh how we've changed! Constantly inundating us with graphic images, violence and crass humor, these ads have become almost shocking in their attempt to get the job done. The next generation of young men seem to enjoy visual depictions of young women in powerless or humiliating situations, hare-brained and asking to be abused (174). Should this really be an image that sells men's body spray? It does. Not only to the 20 somethings, but to the 10 year olds seeking to emulate their older role models.
It hasn't improved much for the women either. One would think that advertisments aimed at us to accept ourselves as naturally beautiful, would be less about, uh... beauty. These ads feature many different cultures of women selling cosmetics (why, if we're already beautiful?), or soap, or perfume. But I've yet to see a hunchbacked, one-eyed toothless woman touted as a 'natural beauty' in an ad for anything. And still physical beauty is overshadowed by any type of mental prowess. Do you see any female nuclear physicists or State Senators in Revlon commercials? Unfortunately, "intelligence, if it is acknowledged at all, is secondary, with beauty being primary" (175).
So please keep your eyes and minds open. Think, ask, analyze...go deeper. Don't just buy into the mindless babble and clutter pulsating from your computer and television. What is the seller trying to get from you (besides you cold hard cash and feelings of inadequacy)? And please, don't get sucked into the vortex of 'gotta have it' so deeply that you must buy a larger house to simply have room for all of those fitness gadgets!
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
"Clive Thompson on the New Literacy"
For all of technology’s supporters, there is always its fair share of opponents, especially when it comes to academics. For some, technology is a blessing and for others, it’s disastrous, it has the ability to control our tones as writers, and our thoughts as communicators, but what impact is it really having on us? Clive Thompson’s article, “Clive Thompson on the New Literacy” explores student’s writing skills in present day and how they’ve developed since technology has came onto the playing field. Andrea Lunsford, who is a professor of writing and rhetoric at Stanford University claims, “I think we’re in the midst of a literacy revolution the likes of which we haven’t seen since Greek civilization.” She believes that the revival of writing may be accredited to all of the technological opportunities we have offered to us in our society. She did a study on some of her students and discovered that thirty eight percent of their writing took place out of the classroom. Popular sites such as facebook and myspace are known for their blogging, status updates and surveys, which are all forms of writing. Some people argue that the writing you do on websites, could negatively affect your school work. Thompson offers the other side of the argument by saying, “When Lunsford examined the work of first-year students, she didn’t find a single example of texting speak in an academic paper.” In other words, students are writing more outside of class, which in turn is causing them to develop a broader range of tones for their audiences, as well as a better sense of vocabulary and sentence structure. Social networking sites can be very addicting because there is always someone to talk to and something to read or write about, but is that such a bad thing? Technology allows us to express ourselves in a way that’s considered acceptable by our peers, while giving us the freedom of being who we are without the stress of being graded on our blog posts or messages. Of course, there will always be people on the other end of the spectrum who look at technology as demeaning and a waste of time, but if we compared their writing abilities to people who use it everyday, would their skills add up?
Thompson ends his article by stating, “We think of writing as either good or bad. What today’s young people know is that knowing who you’re writing for and why you’re writing might be the most crucial factor of all.” He believes that people really can acquire skills through technology and that we are, in fact, learning from it, and displaying it in classrooms. However, why does writing have to be so black and white? Why can’t we find a middle point and accept it for what it is, and what technology is allowing it to become? It’s a source of expression, as well as a gateway to more opportunities, that will be easier to seize if we learn to accept its benefits as well as its faults. When it comes down to it, we will never really know if technology has made us more cultured, or literate, but what we do know is, as Lunsford mentioned, we’re in the midst of a “literacy revolution” and maybe it’s to technology that we owe the gratitude to. The skills we acquire on the internet such as “persuading, organizing and debating” are traits that are sometimes required in the classroom environment, so the more these skills are practiced, theoretically, the better we’ll be at them, right? Cell phones, computers, iPods, televisions; they all seem to surround our everyday lives, so whether we choose to embrace them or shun them is up to us, but ultimately its becoming a part of our future, so we might as well acknowledge and come to terms with it. As far as Clive Thompson and Andrea Lunsford are concerned, technology is helping young writers grow and connect to their academics on a whole new level, and its here to stay.
Thompson ends his article by stating, “We think of writing as either good or bad. What today’s young people know is that knowing who you’re writing for and why you’re writing might be the most crucial factor of all.” He believes that people really can acquire skills through technology and that we are, in fact, learning from it, and displaying it in classrooms. However, why does writing have to be so black and white? Why can’t we find a middle point and accept it for what it is, and what technology is allowing it to become? It’s a source of expression, as well as a gateway to more opportunities, that will be easier to seize if we learn to accept its benefits as well as its faults. When it comes down to it, we will never really know if technology has made us more cultured, or literate, but what we do know is, as Lunsford mentioned, we’re in the midst of a “literacy revolution” and maybe it’s to technology that we owe the gratitude to. The skills we acquire on the internet such as “persuading, organizing and debating” are traits that are sometimes required in the classroom environment, so the more these skills are practiced, theoretically, the better we’ll be at them, right? Cell phones, computers, iPods, televisions; they all seem to surround our everyday lives, so whether we choose to embrace them or shun them is up to us, but ultimately its becoming a part of our future, so we might as well acknowledge and come to terms with it. As far as Clive Thompson and Andrea Lunsford are concerned, technology is helping young writers grow and connect to their academics on a whole new level, and its here to stay.
"Lazy Eyes" By Michael Agger
When it comes to the topic of technology, numerous people would agree that computers have made a lot of lives much easier. Many people take comfort in knowing that everything they need to know is right there at their finger tips. In today’s society it is preferred to go online to find out information about a topic rather than reading it on paper. But with all the reading that takes place online has it altered how people read today?
In the recent work by Michael Agger he talks about how people read information online. It seems that in order to get the attention of online readers it needs to be short, bold and straight to the point. Most people today do not have time to read lengthy articles and are often put off by having to read in depth. To capture the attention of the online reader, information has to be presented in a way that the viewer of the article, image or text should not feel overwhelmed by how much they have to read or view. Many authors that write online often leave big spacing between paragraphs so that it does not look so time consuming. Agger refers to this as “white space.” As a result of putting spacing between paragraphs the observer of the online piece feels that they are not reading as much as they would normally when reading on paper. In Agger’s article called “Lazy Eyes How we read online” he uses easy to read print and separates his editorial into short paragraphs. He makes jokes throughout his article about how he may have lost the concentration of some readers because a few paragraphs are too long or that the audience may have been distracted by other websites. When a person goes online they usually want to find the answers to their questions as quickly as possible, causing a lot of skimming over information. Agger states “We move on if there doesn’t seem to be any good food around” (1). Agger’s point is that if the reader does not find what they are looking for straight away they tend to jump from link to link until they think they have found the answer. With all the links and other websites readers get referred to online it is hard to stay in one place especially when adding social networking sites to the mix.
Although it would seem that reading online would be a quicker process compared reading on paper, studies have show differently. Online reading is 25 percent slower than reading on paper as discovered by Jakob Nielsen. Aggers refers to Nielsen several times throughout his article. Due to the constant distractions that a reader will endure while searching for information online it makes the act of reading much slower. Studies show that more reading takes place on paper because of fewer distractions. Experts suggest ways online readers can make the experience of reading more comfortable. It is important to choose a default font, rest your eyes every 10 minutes, get a good monitor, skip long lines of text that make you tired and stay away from social networking sites. Another way of making reading online more comfortable is that many writers such as Agger have had to adapt their style of writing. Agger himself writes “One idea per paragraph, half the word count of conventional writing! Ouch, other stuff along these lines” (2). Basically what Agger is saying is that if he wants to capture the attention of the online reader he must limit what he would normally write and make it as short as possible while still getting the main points across, which is a skill that many experts such as Nielsen would expect a good writer to be able to do.
Agger goes on to talk about “Lubic reading” and how when a person is enjoying a text they read more slowly whereas if a reader is not fully engaged in a text it becomes a chore. “Lubic reading” can take place online, but with the constant distractions often people do not finish what they were reading. It is expected that more online reading will take place in the future as computers seem to be the way forward, but Agger claims that it will not replace the peaceful and uninterrupted process that readers experience when they read on paper.
In the recent work by Michael Agger he talks about how people read information online. It seems that in order to get the attention of online readers it needs to be short, bold and straight to the point. Most people today do not have time to read lengthy articles and are often put off by having to read in depth. To capture the attention of the online reader, information has to be presented in a way that the viewer of the article, image or text should not feel overwhelmed by how much they have to read or view. Many authors that write online often leave big spacing between paragraphs so that it does not look so time consuming. Agger refers to this as “white space.” As a result of putting spacing between paragraphs the observer of the online piece feels that they are not reading as much as they would normally when reading on paper. In Agger’s article called “Lazy Eyes How we read online” he uses easy to read print and separates his editorial into short paragraphs. He makes jokes throughout his article about how he may have lost the concentration of some readers because a few paragraphs are too long or that the audience may have been distracted by other websites. When a person goes online they usually want to find the answers to their questions as quickly as possible, causing a lot of skimming over information. Agger states “We move on if there doesn’t seem to be any good food around” (1). Agger’s point is that if the reader does not find what they are looking for straight away they tend to jump from link to link until they think they have found the answer. With all the links and other websites readers get referred to online it is hard to stay in one place especially when adding social networking sites to the mix.
Although it would seem that reading online would be a quicker process compared reading on paper, studies have show differently. Online reading is 25 percent slower than reading on paper as discovered by Jakob Nielsen. Aggers refers to Nielsen several times throughout his article. Due to the constant distractions that a reader will endure while searching for information online it makes the act of reading much slower. Studies show that more reading takes place on paper because of fewer distractions. Experts suggest ways online readers can make the experience of reading more comfortable. It is important to choose a default font, rest your eyes every 10 minutes, get a good monitor, skip long lines of text that make you tired and stay away from social networking sites. Another way of making reading online more comfortable is that many writers such as Agger have had to adapt their style of writing. Agger himself writes “One idea per paragraph, half the word count of conventional writing! Ouch, other stuff along these lines” (2). Basically what Agger is saying is that if he wants to capture the attention of the online reader he must limit what he would normally write and make it as short as possible while still getting the main points across, which is a skill that many experts such as Nielsen would expect a good writer to be able to do.
Agger goes on to talk about “Lubic reading” and how when a person is enjoying a text they read more slowly whereas if a reader is not fully engaged in a text it becomes a chore. “Lubic reading” can take place online, but with the constant distractions often people do not finish what they were reading. It is expected that more online reading will take place in the future as computers seem to be the way forward, but Agger claims that it will not replace the peaceful and uninterrupted process that readers experience when they read on paper.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
The Classroom and the Wilder Culture: Identity as a Key to Learning English Composition
lucas w.
Fan Shen’s “The Classroom and the Wilder Culture: Identity as a Key to Learning English Composition” confronts how learning to write English in the U.S. was not merely an education in sentence structure and word translation from one language to the next, but much more than that and life changing too, for Shen had to completely rebuild his identity as a Chinese student.
From the start Shen makes it known that English helped to redefine his way of writing, and consequently certain ideologies needed for writing in English or Chinese. When redefining himself he felt that he needed to change both his “ideological and logical identities”. “Starting with the first English paper I wrote, I found that learning to compose in English is not an isolated activity, but a social and cultural experience.” This cultural experience that Shen speaks of is the eventual immersion into the English language that he had to take. The biggest challenge for him was simply the word “I”, I and all of its related terms, my, me, myself, ect. In Shen’s Chinese writing experience, the self imposed “I” was always lesser to the “we”. Out of respect for the ancestors that came before, out of respect for the party that “we” all are working together to maintain, and out of cultural imprint telling Shen that anything individual was bad. In Chinese, the word for “individualism” has become synonymous with “bad”. It was this cultural identity he knew that hindered his ability to compose well in English. Without the ability to simply express “his” ideas and to accept self in his writing, Shen then began to start writing himself as consciously and forcefully as one could in his position. But as he states, “..writing as many “I’s” was only the beginning of the process of redefining myself.” He then began to formulate that in order to truly express himself in his composition, he needed to change how he saw the world and to step out of his Chinese “self” completely. To help this redefining along, it was a simple game of compare and contrast on paper the features of his Chinese writing self and the features associated with his new English writing identity. This helped to bring out best how Shen could shed the Chinese identity in his English composition.
The next step that Shen had to take to complete the transition was now to change his pattern of writing. In traditional Chinese, Shen tells us that the subject cannot be merely stated, but must be worked towards, slowly working around it until it can blossom. In contrast to this Chinese “beat around the bush” style, Shen noticed the pinnacle of the English “I” and how the subject, much like how he felt that the self is to be treated in English composition, is first and loud. Instead of gradually and systematically working towards the topic, he had to learn to put it first. Working with the topic sentence became his focus, and learning how to create a piece of writing around the topic, and more importantly about the topic, was what helped to separate his two identities. Shen then concludes his change on a note about the logic of his Chinese self and how it is very non-western to write in yijing, or rather, write in such a pictorial sense. Being determined to write as his English self, Shen abandoned the idea of writing in the Chinese pictorial logic and tried better to adapt the western verbal logic.
Shen ends describing his ability to maintain both identities, using a certain one depending on what language he is writing in. He simply sheds one and dons on another, this more than anything to help preserve both identities. His last note is hope for future students who must make this transition, all wrapped around a piece of advice he tries to give to teachers having to be there when this transition of cultural identities happens telling them to be patient.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)