Caller ID

While phones have been around for decades, it is easy to forget that the implementation of caller id is a relatively new phenomena.  I remember when none of the phone in my house had caller ID and a separate attachment was required in order for caller ID. Now, every phone available has caller ID and every voice plan includes caller ID at no additional charge. What got me thinking about caller ID was an interaction I had just the other day with a friend. His phone was ringing and after looking at the screen, he pressed ignore and put the phone back in his pocket. When I asked him why he didn't answer the call he said because he didn't recognize the number. This made me wonder if he would ever answer the phone if he didn't have caller ID. Having caller ID allows us to quickly prepare for a conversation and adjust our tone and mood accordingly.

Caller ID is certainly an example of a medium that has brought social change. When someone is calling me that I don't want to speak with, I don't have to speak to them as I can press the ignore button and let it go to voice mail. Before caller ID, I would have to answer the phone and be forced to have a conversation with someone whom I did not want to speak with.  Secretaries no longer have to screen calls as caller ID does this same thing.

But is this social change good? Is it good that we can so easily decline a conversation from someone? While caller ID is definitely convenient, it also prevents necessary interactions. One can avoid calls for weeks at a time with the aid of caller ID.  There's no spontaneity in conversations nowadays, as very few people interact with strangers for companionship. On the train everyone sits in silence and looks at their cell phone, when 50 years ago everyone would have been making conversation. Similarly, caller ID is just one more innovation that leads us to be anti-social, as it takes the surprise out of every conversation.

Playing Us Like Puppets

I couldn't help but laugh the other day when viewing the top stories on Yahoo.com the other day.  Yahoo! has a slideshow feature on their front page that shows four top stories at a time, and users can cycle through the stories four at a time.  Of the four main stories on their homepage, two were about sports and the other two were about celebrities.  Not until the 7th or 8th series of top stories were relevant issues like politics or the economy discussed.  I found it amusing that "Celebrities' hair makeovers" was considered more of a top story to Yahoo! than "Iran restricts studies."

This got me thinking about the section in chapter four about how editors must decide which stories to feature on the front page.  According to the text, "The front page identifies the editors' selection of the of the most important events of the day, influences which stories will be the most visible, and provides a key measure of success for reports . . ."  Using this logic, if I wanted to be a successful reporter, I could simply journal the hair styling of Miley Cyrus and be on the front page everyday.  Editors continue to load websites and newspapers with junk, which only influences other writers and journalists to produce more junk.

There is a huge influence that these articles have on the public.  By seeing these pop-culture related articles on the front page everyday, people are influenced to take an interest in pop-culture.  This in turn leads people to discussion on pop-culture, and away from discussion on issues that actually matter.  I title my post "Playing Us Like Puppets" because I believe this is exactly what editors want.  Editors do not want readers to be reminded of poverty and murder when they read their content, so they choose to include other content with little meaning.  This is also beneficial to advertisers who pay to advertise with the content producers, as their advertisements are not being displayed on the same pages as crime scenes.  The more we see pop-culture in the media, the more we are lead to believe that these "celebrities" are relevant.  If editors chose to display the current events of Congress on front pages, than discussions amongst the public would be more informed and of greater intellect.

Tabloid Taboo

Walking by the stores in the airport, I couldn't help but notice how many people were purchasing tabloid magazines to read on their flight. Aside from the tabloids though, there wasn't much else for customers to purchase. Of the dozen or so magazines typically offered, over half are magazines the likes of People, The Enquirer, Star, etc. This led me to wonder what fuels the desire for tabloids. Given the incredible boom of the tabloid media, I wonder if their popularity is reflective of the desires of the public, or if tabloids are just jammed down our throat.

Do people really want to read about Brad Pitt's facial hair or Paris Hilton's latest arrest? Are we as a society that uneducated that we must read such petty drivel?

I believe that, for the most part, people read tabloids to escape the harsh realities of the real world.  Reading a real magazine, such as TIME, provides readers with news of current events that matter.  However, they are mostly depressing and do nothing but remind the reader of the cruelties in the world today.The worst thing one can read about in the tabloids is that Spencer Pratt shaved his beard, or Angelina and Brad got in a fight. In TIME magazine, the articles describe war zones and impoverished countries. People do not want to be reminded of how fortunate they are to have drinking water or a roof over their head. This is why I don't watch the news at night- there is nothing positive about it. Magazines generally do not write articles about how great of a job the President is doing or how well the economy is progressing. Everything in the news revolves around negativity and pessimism.

Similarly, tabloids focus on pessimism, but in a different way. Rather than focusing on the negative things that matter, such as our national deficit and unemployment rate, tabloids focus on the shortcomings and failures of individual people who are already successful and set for life. Reading about Lindsay Lohan's recent drug bust makes people feel better about who they are and where they are in their life. Contrastingly, reading about starving children in Africa only makes people feel worthless and guilty for not contributing enough. This is why I believe people love tabloids and their popularity is a reflection of the desires of society.

Exploitation

This week in class we discussed Bradley's recent blog in which he defended the exploitation of women in advertisements and it got me thinking about a few things.

First, what do we mean by exploiting? I looked up the word exploit on merriam-webster.com and the definitions it gave me were as follows:

1.  to make productive use of : utilize <exploiting your talents> <exploit your opponent's weakness>

2

: to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage<exploiting migrant farm workers>

This provides an extremely broad view of exploitation as one may view it positively or negatively. A model posing in her underwear to sell a product may be looked at in multiple ways. One may believe she is the one exploiting, as she is using her body to make money and start/continue her career. Contrastingly, others may believe she is the one being exploited, as a company is using her body to sell their product. Regardless, why is it an issue? If the model is profiting from the pay she is receiving, and the company is profiting from the revenue the advertisement produces, then who loses? For those that wish to counter with "the public loses because these advertisements create a negative stereotype and lead to eating disorders," you're wrong. People WANT to see skinny beautiful models in advertisements. If people didn't want this, they would stop buying products from companies that use this type of advertisement. And I don't see Victoria's Secret going out of business anytime soon...

Additionally, men are exploited just as much as women are. Michael Jordan is exploited by Nike who makes billions of dollars off the Jordan brand. Nike never mentions Jordan's philanthropy work, they just mention how good he was at basketball. And do you think Michael Jordan cares? Absolutely not- he's laughing all the way to the bank. Just like those models who get paid tons of money to take their clothes off. Whether you want to call it exploitation or not, they call it making money. 

Hold Your Criticism

Reading through the blogs of my fellow classmates, I have noticed a fairly consistent theme: they all talk negatively of media. Many of the blogs speak negatively about the relationship between media and stereotypes, citing media as the number one source of stereotype generation. Other blogs speak of the addiction many have to particular mediums, with one even going so far as to comparing a Facebook addiction to a heroin addiction. While I may share some of these beliefs, I do believe that media also has many positive aspects to it. Even aside from the communication of news, which most media do, there are other uses of media that serve a functional and positive role in society.

My first example is the amber alert system. The amber alert system is a child abduction alert bulletin that alerts people through numerous mediums when a child is abducted. Descriptions of the child, as well as the suspected abductor and their vehicle, are sent via email and text message to those subscribed to receive alerts. Additionally, the descriptions can be seen on electronic traffic signs and on billboards of participating companies. This revolutionary system has already saved lives, and proves just how valuable media are in our society.

Another example are wanted posters posted by the FBI. The US Government uses media in a very smart manner, as they post pictures of wanted criminals in public places with information about the criminal as well as the monetary reward for their capture. The FBI even goes a step further and airs a popular show, America's Most Wanted, to help capture criminals. As of September 4, 2010, 1,128 criminals have been arrested because of this television show (Wikipedia).

In light of the Virginia Tech Massacre, where a gunman opened fire on a college campus and killed 32 innocent civilians, colleges around the world are deploying a campus alert system to warn students of potential danger immediately. The primary way campuses are able to do so is through text message. A text message can be sent and received in a matter of seconds, giving students valuable time to find safety and avoid danger. Babson has an alert system, and it is just one of many ways that media are savings lives and protecting the public.