Obama Conspiracy Theory

I am so sick and tired of all the media play that Trump's accusations about President Obama receive.  His theories, it seem, get a lot of attention in terms of content, while not a lot of attention is paid to where his accusations actually come from, nor how he backs them up.  Frankly, the media has been paying more attention to the silliness behind the birth certificate conspiracy theory than any other issue facing our society; the biggest news was the issue of Obama's birth certificate.

Like Obama, I find it frustrating that in a time of so many serious and bigger issues, the validity of his birth certificate is all American media talks about.

I think it's really unfortunate that Obama had to succumb to pressure from both Trump and the media in releasing his birth certificate.  Even more unfortunate is now that Obama's birth certificate has been released, Trump needed to come up with a new conspiracy theory concerning the validity of Obama's education.

Come on Trump.  Isn't it time to move on?

Celeb Twitter Feuds

In Ted Casablanca's section of the E! online website he always gets down to "the awful truth".  A recent story by Ted, "Are Celeb Twitter Feuds the New Trending Topics?" (it can be read here) struck me as pretty interesting.  Ted suggests that in an effort to gain new followers and keep their own names in the press, celebs start twitter feuds between themselves and another high profile individual.  Interestingly enough, I kind of think Ted's right.  It seems the celebrities who do steep low enough to have a Twitter feud are those who need a new reason to be in the spotlight, or those who we would expect immature behavior from.

The Last "Boys Club"

I found Corielle's part of today's presentation extremely interesting.  Her research behind the idea that the comedy genre is incredibly dominated by the male gender opened my eyes to something I'd never really paid attention to before.  Perhaps it's because I'm not generally a comedy watcher, but I had never truly realized the predominance of men in the comedy sphere.

I found it truly intriguing (and pretty ludicrous) that suggestions have been made that women never learn to develop a sense of humor in the same way men do.  The belief is that women don't need humor as a tool in the same way as men; women don't need humor to attract men or function in social scenarios.  I don't necessarily think this is a fair point. I may not be very funny, but I don't believe it's a result of not needing humor to function in social scenarios.  I believe women don't develop as strong of a sense of humor as men because of traditional gender roles.  However, it does seem the emergence of women comedians is occurring at a faster pace with our generation.  I would argue we are a generation of social change.

An argument that has been made through time indicates women don't understand life is quite possibly a joke to begin with.  Even though it's a presumptuous argument, Corielle explained it is highly backed up.  Again, I don't believe this is a fair suggestion.

I can absolutely see how women are excluded from comedy because it is aggressive, and humor itself is an exertion of dominance.  Through time, women have struggled to attain a role of dominance in any facet of media.  The woman is time and again represented as the subordinate, sexual being.  There are very few women with power roles who aren't in a position where an emphasis is placed to "look good" and attract all the while.

I really enjoy when I'm presented with information that is new to me, and I think Corielle's research behind male dominance in the comedy sphere was really pretty fascinating.

Our Changing World

For some reason, I found myself lacking inspiration for today's post.  I felt as though I had exhausted all of my topics concerning media and was pretty frustrated in coming up with an idea.  Desperate for an idea, I did what all Gen. Y does when they're in need of an idea or information: I searched the internet.  I went straight to Google, and after some failed search attempts, I came across a video that Dr. Bob has actually shown me in a class before this.  The YouTube video, entitled "Did You Know 3.0?" essentially explains our changing world and outlines how our changing world is fueling the growth of social media.

The video speaks for itself, so I encourage you to watch it.  I really can't present the facts any better than they do.

Isn't it interesting that in looking for inspiration on media I sought media tools themselves? The best part is that the inspiration I found came from one of the most popular media websites available, YouTube.

It truly is a changing world.

An Interesting Experiment

I'm writing a final paper for another class (not media related) which required me to perform an interesting and ultimately insightful experiment.  The experiment required that I watch three hours of media and explore the types of messages the media suggests to adolescents about sexuality and sexual relationships.  Then, I was required to contemplate how these messages might influence adolescents in their development of sexual identities.  In conducting my own research, I was sure I would discover a commonality between the types of messages the media transmits and how adolescents develop their sexual identities.  Although I did come across commonalities, I was surprised at some of the messages the media transmits. 

When it came time to gain experience and collect my own research, I chose to analyze television shows as the specific forms of media.  I wanted to have a basis to compare the media on, so I chose to watch episodes of varying genres: two episodes of the drama, House and two episodes of the reality show, The Jersey Shore.

House is a program whose central character, Dr. Gregory House, is a sarcastic and complex medical genius.  Dr. House, along with his team of physicians whom he shows little respect, solves a variety of medical mysteries.  I chose to watch House because Dr. House displays numerous crude characteristics.  I believed any sexual references he made would be sexist and crass; I was interested to explore the types of messages he potentially transmitted.    The Jersey Shore is a reality program whose central characters are a group of rowdy and perhaps, irresponsible young adults.  The cast is not shy about their sexuality or sexual endeavors.  I chose this show because it was a “reality” program.  Therefore, it sparked an interest in terms of what the media offers audience members as the deemed social reality or cultural norm.  Based on my findings (and from what we've learned in SSP 327), I can argue with conviction that the media exposes its audience to numerous messages about sex and sexuality.  Instances of sexual behavior and verbal discussions about sexuality and sexual relationships surfaced in numbers.  What struck me as most interesting however, was that the genre of the show didn't make too profound a difference in requisite to the amount of sexuality expressed.    Also interesting to me, was the difference in the amount of sexuality expressed in terms of gender.  Although both males and females were open in their discussions about sex, it seemed the males really came across as sexually aggressive and suggestive in both of the shows I watched. In the past, media focused a lot on the woman who is time and again "swept away" by the idea of sex.  Now, it seems media is much more focused on the sexually aggressive male who, no matter how crass he acts, ends up with a woman in his bed at night.    I was also quite interested in the media's inability to take sex out of literally any aspect of life.  All of the episodes of House take place in their workplace, but sex emerges over and over again.  If television really is playing the role of a super peer in terms of sex education, media sex warrants considerable concern.  I urge you to run this sort of experiment yourself while you watch television.  I bet you'll come across some pretty surprising and interesting sexual messages in the media, and I wonder if you too will think media sex warrants considerable concern.

Obsessed with the Royal Wedding

The fuss surrounding the upcoming wedding between Kate Middleton and Prince William is pretty outstanding.  The American media, it seems, is obsessed with the royal wedding and has been for quite some time.  For weeks we have been hearing about Kate's dress, her ring, the carriage they'll show up in and more.

Even more interesting is the commercial goods that have emerged as a result of the fuss behind the wedding.  Dunkin Donuts, for example, has a commemorative doughnut available between April 24 and 29 in honor of the pair.  GM is offering a Kate and Will refrigerator, complete with a photo of the couple on the doors of the refrigerator.  Pez candy company has created dispensers that look like the couple.  Papa John's is auctioning off a portrait pizza of the couple.  And, my particular favorite is the "Knit your own Royal Wedding Kit" that is being sold in craft stores all over the country.  Knit your own royal wedding?!---"Stitch together an entire royal party" is the catch phrase.  I actually laughed.  Is this so you can act the wedding out in your home with toys while you watch the live coverage of the affair?

I've spent a lot of time wondering what makes American media so obsessed with the royal wedding.  It doesn't affect us much, yet I'd assume we're more interested than the British media.  My guess is that because Kate is a 'normal' girl and not a celebrity people feel she is somewhat relatable.  If Kate gets her fairy tale, we believe that we too can get ours.  Are there perhaps other reasons we're so interested in the royal wedding?

The 'Created Celebrity' @ New Heights

All aspects of media are increasingly dependent on created rather than established celebrities.  Networks like Bravo, E! and MTV wouldn't exist without their 'Real Housewives', Kardashians or 'Jersey Shore' stars respectively.

It really does seem that the popularity of the created celebrity is at new heights, and I don't anticipate it stopping anytime soon.  These new stars lack the talents that traditionally lead to super-stardom, but their fame is undeniable.  The Kardashians, for instance have created an entire empire for themselves.  Their mom and manager, Kris Jenner, refers to their achieved fame as, "their brand".  Bravo's network, in particular, can't get enough of the 'created celebrity'.  Their newest addition to the network, Rosie Pope, is a woman who created celebrity for herself when she dubbed herself maternity concierge.  Talk about a nontraditional way of achieving celebrity;  Rosie caters to the rich, pregnant divas of NYC and has become a celebrity for it. (And yes, I'll admit -- I watch her show)

Being that I'm so interested in both media and celebrity, I've spent a lot of time considering why I believe people are so fascinated with the 'created celebrity'.  I've come up with several hypotheses, but the one that seems to be most plausible welcomes the fact that created celebrity gives 'regular' people, such as ourselves, the notion that we, too can achieve celebrity.

Strangely enough, it seems there is a desirable quality associated with achieving superstardom for things that don't necessarily make an individual worthy of super-stardom.