Pre Class

This reading focused heavily on the culture industry, and helped the to try to grasp what truly is culture, and how it is always changing. "Culture is filled with different industries." These different industries may be the commercial growth of a brand and its marketing campaign through society. For my interests, i like to see how advertisements play a role in society, and how they have a impact in our culture. For example, when we see apple commercials, we instantly feel a need to join the group of apple supporters, and fit right into society. There campaign is filled with the emphasiziation of the crisp and clean iPhones, and most always feature a white back ground. "The whole world is passed through a filter of the culture industry. From what Horkenheimer and Adorno are saying I believe that they are touching on the idea that new products and ideas are always being created, but we let culture and society decide what stays by "filtering everything through society" meaning advertisements and sales campaigns. The test to see if they were filtered out all comes down to sales. There is also groups that are not looking to be mainstream, and these are called subcultures. They create there own groups based on a common interest, and they don't care what general society feels, they have there own filter. For example, when it comes to surfing and products, i filter out what i don't like and that brand is now discarded until later. Society is filtered and led by those that are higher than us. We always strive to be better or like somebody else in ways, and this leads us to want items and goods they want. While watching Bloomberg, they talked about how samsung is now giving products to the NBA, because they want to have the players using them, and have fans see them using them, and the circle of marketing is complete. The desired customer sees a product from a role model, and goes to buy the product to feel like or closer to the individual.

culture industry pre blog- fang

After having read Adorno and discussing the culture industry in 100, I was certain that I would get this right away and this would be a breeze reading but I soon learned that I read an excerpt of Adorno and was in way over my head. Adorno seems to be building off of Benjamin’s “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” essay in that they both are critiquing the current value and worth of art in our society, they are just much more confusing and dense.

Adorno and Horkheimer are clearly displeased with the current state of “culture” and how it is “infecting everything with sameness” (53). They seem to show that culture as an entertainment industry indoctrinates us with ideology that we passively accept as “the whole world is passed through the filter of the culture industry” (56). Like Althusser’s notion of ISAs, culture is putting forth ideas and by choosing to watch movies and listen to hit songs, we engage the ideology that culture puts off. They are also disappointed in the sameness of culture, regardless of the medium. They say, “hit songs, stars, and soap operas conform to types recurring cyclically as rigid invariants, but the specific content of productions, the seemingly variable element, is itself derived from those types. The details become interchangeable.” (55). Adorno and Horkheimer lost faith with the culture industry as it “cheats its consumers out of what it endlessly promises” (62). Their final grievance with culture industry is about how it has distanced itself from reality (kinda like Baudrillard and Zizek) and people use it to escape the less entertaining reality.

Hebidge is a doozy and I can’t even begin to try to blog about it so hopefully class fixes that.

ruqayyahali, 10/28

"the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force." (C, 39)

This reading about Marx and ideology got me thinking about the British. What about the British, you may ask? Well, the British were a conquering society that traveled to various lands and established a rule over them. While they had their own bourgeoisie and aristocracy within English society, they were the dominating force when they made the journey to other lands they were conquering. They were the material and intellectual ruling force of those societies.

For example, the British established governmental rule over Trinidad & Tobago in 1802 after fighting for possession of the island nation from the Spanish. From that time, English setters flocked to the land, the monarchy governed the island, the school system was British, the religion of the nation was imposed on the islanders, and Trinidad became a mini sector of Britain in the Caribbean as many other islands of the time were.

What I'm looking to address here is not really the domination of Britain on Trinidad at the time but its longevity and the established ideology that the British left behind on the island. For example, despite achieving independence from the United Kingdom in 1962, Trinidad still uses the British educational system. In past, Britain embodied Marx's discussion about the material rulers being the intellectual rulers at the same time. In modern day, Trinidad is essentially still ruled by British ideology. 90% of their material products come from the UK to this day and the school system is regarded as stellar.

I have brought this idea up, especially about the school system, because I can see how ideology is established and lasts beyond its initial establishment. People in Trinidad and even those who were educated there through grade school before attending college in the States or the UK, such as my parents, definitely view the British school system with the highest regard.

Thus, through this reading I was thinking of the lasting ideology that Britain has imparted on all the nations it has governed and is still governing. It has established a solid hold on the culture of other nations because it has been such a dominant factor of history.

Higgins-Post Class fang

Technology has transformed millions of lives, from the day the first computer was invented to the many apps on the iphone. People rely so heavily on the advancements of technology that in some ways our greatest asset could be our biggest downfall. If the country ever lost all access to phones, computers, etc, the nation would sky rocket into a immediate spiral. Our economy and government run on the many high tech computer systems that allow our country to run properly. The biggest fear would be a way to block all access to our relied up technological outlets. Social media would be null and avoid which would prevent a major source of communicating along with e-mails and phone calls. Television announcements concerning the current situation wouldn't be possible. Overall, its a scary thought to have but one that cannot be forgotten. Next time you wake up, try and pay attention to how often you use your technology devices until you go to bed, you definitely surprise yourself.

Rhizomic?

http://www.tampabay.com/features/humaninterest/more-than-10000-families-want-to-adopt-orphan-davion-only/2149190

Poster: Post-Class

After attending class this week, the quote that really interested me was in Poster's "Postmodern Virtualities." He states, "technology has taken a turn that defines the character of power in modern governments." He points out that in the society we live in today, we rely so heavily on technology: from the individual level (cell phones, television programming, social networking) all the way up to the institutional level. I immediately associated this quote with the previews I have seen for a show called Revolution on NBC. It's about a global blackout that effects all forms of technology: electronics, electricity, transportation, etc., and how this effects society. The show takes place 15 years after the Blackout, and it depicts the institutions of the modern world as completely shut down because of this. 

The beginning of this trailer shows a typical American family in Chicago who are completely and blissfully reliant on technology. The mother is on the phone with her husband while the young children are like zombies watching the television and playing on the iPad. When the Blackout occurs, the children start crying and all chaos breaks loose. The narrator explains how they "used electricity for everything, even to grow food and pump water." After the Blackout, "governments fell and militias and warlords and generals rose up." I think this is exactly what Poster was getting at in his piece: technology has become a vital part of the society that we live in, and without it living life seems almost impossible.

lacansmirror, Hebdige

Hebdige examines the concept of culture as he begins the chapter by defining it with an outdated definition.  It says that culture is a "cultivation, tending, in christian authors, worship; the action or practice of cultivating the soil; tillage, husbandry; the cultivation of rearing of certain animals"...I could not go on (124).  My definition of culture would not have used one of those words.  If I was describing old farm life, maybe, but that's about as far as this definition resonated with me.  Hebdige agrees that a definition like that  is ambiguous and simply reflects the past centuries definitions instead of adapting to the way our culture is today.
Later in the chapter he explains that "the theory of culture now involved the 'study of relationships between elements in a whole way of life'" (125).  The original new elements of life were still focused on face-to-face relationships.  Since there were more cultural relationships established, I argue that this would be culture 2.0 compared to the first definition in the chapter.  In a postmodern era, I believe our culture still heavily revolves around relationships, but now it is on many more levels.  We show culture online when connecting with friends, offline when at work, and we connect ourselves between our real and virtual identities.

These three types of relationships come together to create the culture 3.0 that we live in today.  Hebdige discusses social relations and processes in the ways they are "appropriated by individuals only through the forms in which the are represented to those individuals" (128).  The sign identities that our culture inherits define ideological dimensions and value semiotics.  Hegemony is a dominance of power, but in culture 3.0, the semiotic value in one aspect of culture can outweigh or influence the rest of it.  To be truly hegemonic the 'self' must have semiotic value on all ideological dimensions.

pre class Marx/Althusser- fang

In their readings, Marx and Althusser explain the power of ideology amongst society, but more importantly, how it is controlled and spread. Karl Marx explains the spread of ideology very well when he states "the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force" (C 39). Because they are in control of the flow and aura in their respective societies, the "ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas" (C 39). Marx demonstrates that the ruling class is in the position of crafting the social construct of their society and they, while not named, are the kings and queens of their respective kingdom. Therefore, their ideology gets passed through the masses passively and eventually instinctively.
Althusser, a bit more recent, builds off of Marx's State Apparatus and ISAs. The RSAs use repression and laws to indoctrinate the people whereas ISAs are much more deceptive and therefore powerful. People have forced to follow the RSAs but the ISAs are crafty and able to set forth ideology that people seemingly choose.

lacansmirror, 10/27

Eco and Dorfman critique Disney as being "a place of total passivity" (205).  I completely agree with their analysis.  The idea of paying to wait in lines for hours like sheep, forced to walk past rows of stores with only Disney merchandise, all to go on a minute long ride seems like an outrageous rip-off.  Dorfman argues that the construction of Disney is attractive because it allows us to turn off our brains and be in a fantasy world.  In order to create a quality space for fantasy, "Disney tells us that technology can give us more reality than nature can" (203).
When Disney's nature represents the reality we want, we are willing to pay a lot to pretend it actually exists.  Someone in a mental state of fantasy is also less likely to rationally think about their purchases.  That is why buying the silly hat that you will never wear again is popular and heavily valued in the parks.  When you are experiencing your own fantasy, that goofy hat may add to your experience.  In a typical fantasy, rules are defined by the individual.  A guest at Disney can imagine an unrealistic place, but they still need to "behave like robots" and follow Disney's rules (205).  Most rides take their guest on a journey, but the rider is simply a guest observing and absorbing messages.  Riders do not have control to create their own journey; instead, the fantasy is developed for them.

Rides like Buzz Lightyear's Space Ranger Spin allow riders to play a game by shooting at targets on the walls.  The car that takes you from room to room also allows riders to rotate it manually.  However, the car still goes down the same track each time.  No matter which way you rotate or where you shoot, Disney still has complete control.  Rides like these give the illusion of control by reinforcing the passive acceptance of rules from the patron.  The Disney experience is not about a personal fantasy, it is about experiencing their constructed fantasy.

The last time I went to Disney I felt like my freedom of expression was heavily censored and I felt forced to remain passive.  I was almost asked to leave the park because I "stuck my tongue out" when the automatic camera took my photo on a ride.  In this photo I had a smile on my face, my tongue was out, and I was simply enjoying the experience.  When I exited the ride, a Disney employee asked me to step aside to explain the inappropriateness of my actions.  When I attempted to defend my actions, I was interrupted and told to either follow their rules or I'd be escorted out of the park. :P

post class- fang

The past week's classes have been nothing short of tragically depressing. Essentially, we've covered a lot of ground from the demolition of my childhood love of Disney to critically analyzing whether not I even understand reality despite the fact I claim to live in it. Though overwhelming, the past few discussions have enabled me to think about my own perceptions of reality and the ramifications, if there were any, of drifting off into a fantasy land or even just skewing the reality you live in then.

As children, particularly during recess, many of us are told to use our imaginations and play games of "make-believe" where you are a cop and others are robbers or a game of king of the hill turns into knights trying to get into a castle. When the bell rings or a teacher calls you back in from recess, that game gets paused and it then becomes time to go back to the reality of school. It is at this young age and early development that the idea of breaking from reality is incredibly appealing. When given the option (even today) of the monotony of school versus the exciting and unpredictable recess, recess wins every time. So, really, why should people want to pursue reality when the alternative is grandiose and uplifting?

In the The Office episode "Local Ad", Jim finds out that in an effort to cope with his break-up, Dwight created a profile on Second Life and lives the same life he leads in his actual life only he is manager, not assistant to the regional manager and he is still with Angela, his love interest. He even goes so far as to make a game in Second Life called "Second Second Life" where that avatar seeks his dreams as CEO and married.

 The episode demonstrates that is human nature to see the grass as greener on the other side and to always want more. That is how our perception of reality is. Now, however, with intense disillusionment about government and technology, our inclination to seek out a new reality, better than our own, is greater than it has been in a while. While I don't know what the proper way to handle reality is, I do think that there is nothing wrong with experimenting with the simulacra to just boost your spirits in a time when a lot of things suck. The issue is can/will we come back to reality when things are better.

Post Class: ruqayyahali, 10/23

"Everything that kills me makes me feel alive."

I've been listening to Counting Stars since it was played in class on Wednesday mostly for the beat. However I've been thinking about the lyrics these last few times and how they apply to the reading we did this past week. In particular, I was thinking about Rollins Confessions, its appeal, and how it pertains to how doing something wrong makes us feel excited and alive. 

There's something about anonymity that appeals to us. People who post on Rollins Confessions are constantly complaining, saying random things that would normally be judged if said in reality, or even sometimes saying something nice because they don't have to say it to the person's face. What is it about this veil of discretion that we love? Why are we so excited by the idea of saying what we have to say without wanting others to know who is saying it? 

To me, this hinders the progress and growth of individuality. People would rather hide behind a cloud of smoke than come out because they are afraid of how others will see them or what they will think of them. Living in this virtual reality, this world that is a world but isn't, gives us the opportunity to do better and make change but instead people resort to petty idiocies such as those often posted on pages such as Rollins Confessions. While that might be thought of as entertainment on some level, I can't help but see how that is more harmful than helpful. 

So as I was going through this week, I watched the posts on Rollins Confessions and the areas I contribute my own virtual life to: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, random surfing, etc, as I listened to Counting Stars and wondered what it is about deviance that enamors humans. Why do we are we so obsessed with going to that which is not necessarily good for us than what is good for us? Then again, who says what is good and what is wrong? 

I think this is why virtual reality is such a popular outlet among the current generation and upcoming one. It gives them a place to be open without any kind of reprimand. We feel alive because its an open space of all kinds of freedom. We aren't part of reality there, we can create our own reality and no one ever has to know that we're the illustrators of our own little world. 

Thus, we exist in this virtuality better than reality because we can create what we want and we can get lost in it. Lost in our own personal worlds. Lost in the unknown.

Post Class

I found Thursday's past class very interesting in the aspect of when we were talking about Disney and how it "is hard to enjoy it now that we are CMC majors." I find this to be a ridiculous statement. Disney's idea is all about "imagination" and we are imagining that we live in this perfect world. Everyone knows that it is not like that because in the real world there is violence, racism, and social hierarchy. Disney masks all of those, and everyone is made equal. Money doesn't matter. The rich and the poor are treated the same, as they all have to wait in the same line for the same enjoyment. I go a few times a month, because i enjoy the idea of escaping the reality of the real world. I do not find it to be a negative thing. It brings us past memories from when i was a child, and the last thing that i am thinking about when i am there is looking at Disney through a Critical Lens, but rather enjoying my surrounds, and not criticizing this world, that is changing the world.

As far as Disney movies i feel the same way. I think that looking at them through a CMC lens, ruins them, and i don't understand why we need to be so negative. We all have great memories, and no matter how much i learn about the so called negatives, i will always look positively at Disney and support everything from the movies, to its a small world.

The World Famous, and Beloved 

Pre-Class Blog 10/23

ruqayyahali, Poster

Technology is postModern. Essentially this is what Poster is saying about the virtual multimedia world that we live in. Technology gives is the opportunity to improve communications, share information, and promote democracy because of these increased abilities. This is our road to the future, the a faster and more effective mode of acquiring knowledge, to our understanding of the world--- this is the Information Highway.

We as humans are carried along this highway because of our desire to be up to date; to gain information before others; to always be 'in the know.' This works perfectly until we begin to question reality and how much it exists in a world where most of the population spends its time in cyberspace. Because, in today's world, this is reality. Humans spend more time on the internet and in the virtual world than the real one because it is a source of endless information whether beneficial or not.

For me, this ties into our past readings of Baudrillard and Zizek about what is real. What is real? It seems almost as if this virtual world that we have created is more real because people live and spend time in it. Some people are inseparable from this world and forget that there's a tangible, physical world outside that they are a part of. Is this good or bad? It depends on who you ask. Some may say that what is real is in the physical world while others may say that reality is actually in cyberspace where information is rampant and available because there are so many who are so attached to the virtual world that they have created 'communities' due to their numbers.

This comes down to the everyday use of smartphones and the internet, etc. Is everyone a part of these communities that makeup the cyber world? How much are we really invested in this unreality that is considered to be a reality? What's your level of real and unreal?

Higgins-Poster

The one thing that could in my opinion define the 21st century so far would be Social Media. The dramatic expansion of it has been a significant captivator to all who participate. Cell phones being the biggest way today of communicating with others. Mainly through the apps that can be downloaded on the phone, such as Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram and much more. The whole concept of these applications allow for humans to be so in touch with others, that it wasn't even dreamed possible 20-30 years ago. Speeds of communicating have tripled from the end of the 20th century and will continue to do so in the upcoming years. But what effect does this have on us as an overall society? Poster proposes the following question, "does freedom of speech extend to cyberspace,as it does to print.(445)"

People have gained this newly found right to post things in social media outlets that would not be said anytime face to face. The distance between the one thats posting about something or someone to the actual target feels infinite when using cell phones or internet. But, when faced to encounter that person or thing in daily life, one can see a dramatic change in attitude. The communication methods we use today have changed opinions due to the lack of regret people receive when posting online. In a public space, people tend to hold things in but on the internet everything can break loose. The world has completely bought in social media and technology and one can only wonder whats next. 

lacansmirror, Poster

Mark Poster addresses the Postmodern Virtualities of our culture and communication systems.  The early concept that Poster explains is the 'Communications Superhighway' where he says the internet has enabled individuals to communicate in new ways and at faster speeds.  Technical innovations in the 80's & 90's have shaped the communication frameworks that we use today.
Poster argues that new forms of communication or 'information superhighways' provides "new efficiencies but by itself changes nothing" (444).  Apps like Snapchat have transformed the way teens communicate, but without 'snaps' or active users, Snapchat means nothing.  The way we use Snapchat also dictates its meaning in our culture.

Later in the chapter, Poster writes about freedom of speech issues with cyberspace.  He asks, "does freedom of speech extend to cyberspace, as it does to print?" (445).  I would argue that is does the same way it does in print, but even print is censored.  You don't see the New York Times or their writers posting discriminatory articles or statements just because they have the right.  Whenever an individual is required to put their name on something, they often naturally censor themselves.  Online there is the same situation, your name and IP address are connected to almost everything you say online.  Therefore, self censorship is present in the cyber medium as well.  In anonymous forums, freedom of speech is often abused and can be hurtful.  Poster argues that people have the right to say how they feel, but there are problems when those feelings are not theirs.  A huge problem with cyberspace is that intellectual property stolen and copied constantly with little control.  It is essential for authors to publish their works online, but protecting their work is a challenge.

Poster: Pre-class

In the Poster's piece, "Pstomodern Virtualities," he starts off by commenting on postmodern culture and new systems of communication, and how these two discussions are related. The fast-paced flow of advances in the technology of communication have allowed for equally fast-paced changes in our society. From the telephone, to the radio, television to the internet, each of these forms of media have changed how we as a culture interact and communicate with one another. Poster comments how "critical theorists such as Benjamin, Enzenberger and McLuhan envisioned the democratic potential of the increased communication capacity of radio, film and television" (443). The government has funded and censored some aspects of the internet, which since its creation has become an essential part of modern human life, both for the common, everyday person, to the institutions that govern us. The invention of the cell phone has revolutionized how we communicate with one another; we can find out how someone is doing half way around the world with the touch of a few buttons. Everyone I know never leaves home without their cell phone; they feel naked without it. And with technologies like texting, video chat, and social media sites, staying in touch is easier than ever.

Dorfman: Pre-class

In the piece, "Instructions on How to Become a General in the Disneyland Club," Ariel Dorfman criticizes the power of the Disney corporation. He claims that "in juvenile literature, the adult, corroded by the trivia of everyday life blindly defends his image of youth and innocence.... [and] thus, the imagination of the child is conceived as the past and future utopia of the adult" (113). I think this is saying that because the world of Disney is created by adults who have their own ideas of what the innocence of childhood should be like, the constructions of this "utopia" are unrealistic and can sometimes even contain subliminal messages/agendas. Children watching Disney programs pick up on the way in which the characters interact with one another, problem solve, etc. and thus learn to imitate what they see on screen  Children are not aware that the television shows, cartoons, comic books, etc that they are consuming could be biased and contain propaganda. Dorfman states that "fiction reinforces, in a cicular fashion, the manner in which the adult desires the comic be received and read" (114). By having our youth absorb the messages and lessons told by Disney, we are in a way inhibiting them from expressing their own, natural creativity. Disney acts as an authoritative "father surrogate," telling the youth what childhood is supposed to be like. "The authoritarian relationship between the real life parent and child is repeated and reinforced within the fantasy world itself" (114).

lacansmirror, Jenkins

Upon reading the title of Jenkins chapter, Quentin Tarantino's Star Wars, I knew I would enjoy reading it. Star Wars has become such an iconic brand that Jenkins would consider it a meta-narrative.  Like most major media texts, spoofs, spin-offs, parodies, and copies are made.  We have seen Simpsons, South Park, and Family Guy references, but my favorite movie parody growing up was Spaceballs.

John Candy, Mel Brooks, and Rick Moranis play characters that mock those seen in Star Wars.  Some of them include Pizza the Hut and Darth Helmet.  Instead of a cool postmodern looking spaceship, they have a flying RV.  Jenkins argues that digital cinema allows for reworks and culture jams of original texts.  Jenkins also says that "Star Wars is, in many ways, the prime example of media convergence at work" (455).  Jenkins example was that George Lucas deferred his salary for the first film in order to keep a share of ancillary profits.  In his case, he was much more profitable by holding out early on in his career. Convergence in this regard is seen often in the tech world.  The wealthiest tech giants were all offered millions of dollars for their ideas when they started, but they waited and now they are worth a lot more.  The most recent example of this is Mark Zuckerberg at Facebook who continued to decline buyouts and other offers in order to continue growing his company.
More importantly, Jankins describes the importance of our participatory culture.  Digital media encourages viewers to participate in it through many mediums.  Whether one participates though satire, buying branded goods, or role-playing a text themselves, participation is always included in a successful work.

On YouTube we find that participation is present when videos go viral; but when we buy the cereal with a Star Wars character, we are participating as well.

AsToldByGinger, Poster/Jenkins

In Jenkins essay he explores Star Wars, as a catalyst for somewhat of a DIY age. He says that the multiple spinoff of fanfilms that have emerged since the beginning of Stars Wars represent a cultural movement that "enable the grassroots archiving, annotation, appropriation, and recirculation of media content" (Jenkins 454). This brought to light the idea of video's going "viral," as in infiltrating and infecting multiple areas of the web, and reaching mass amounts of viewers in small amounts of time. Such recent viral videos include "What Does The Fox Say," "Wrecking Ball," and "Harlem Shake." Along with these video's going viral, many now wildly successful artists have been discovered purely due to their own video's gaining the attention of millions. One such example is Justin Bieber who was
discovered from youtube, and the rest is history.

Another theme that Jenkins conveys through the DIY notion is that through this participatory culture, fans as well as other outlets (with the proper licensing)  can generate excitement on a companies behalf (Star Wars) without them doing the work themselves. One such example of this is one of my favorite commercials of all time, released during the 2011 super bowl, in which Volkswagen utilized the Star Wars theme and in turn created a viral video, today having over 58 million hits. This video generation much buzz for Volkswagen, but more importantly the Star Wars empire in general. Jenkins says, "In many ways, the Web has become the digital refrigerator for the "Do-It-Yourself" ("DIY") movement" (Jenkins 457).

27Percent, Poster (preclass)

Virtual reality is a very common technology in our postmodern world today. I would like to say I’ve experienced the road this technology has taken beginning in my fourth grade computer class playing The Oregon Trail, where my family and I were traveling the trail in our covered wagon where we would buy and sell items to live off of. This game was a staple in my elementary school and I had my own character within the family and contribute to my family’s income and survival. My next obsession with virtual reality was the Sims online game series and eventually the Wii sports games. When the original Wii came out, I was amazed that you could wirelessly play games that would somehow connect the movements that your hands and body makes and put them on the screen in front of you. Poster states, “Virtual reality is a computer-generated ‘place’ which is ‘viewed’ by the participant through ‘goggles’ but which responds stimuli from the participant or participants” (Poster 447). What differs from real reality in virtual reality is that virtual reality “evoke play and discovery, instituting a new level of imagination” (Poster 447). In these Wii games, you can literally create your own character that looks somewhat like yourself and name it as a human being. You put yourself in the game and immerse yourself in this fantasy world where you play different sports games. I’m way better at Wii tennis than I am at playing actual tennis, and still the emotions occur exactly like playing real tennis. I still grunt when I swing my hand through the air to hit this computer generated tennis ball, and I still shuffle around my living room just as I would out on the court, and sometimes if I play long enough I’ll sweat a little too. Virtual reality creates a world or a scene of somewhere I can place myself and let my imagination take control. I first handedly know how people can become obsessed with this sense of reality.

Disney

In this reading they focused on disney and the influences that it has on society. This topic sparks my interest in ways that people seem to attack disney when we analyze its ways, as they are "shaping our youth negatively" or they have hidden themes in the movies that are not a good influence on a young and impressionable mind." I can remember watching every disney movie as a child and let me tell everyone who says things negatively about disney, my only impressions that i remember were positive, and never results me to have negative viewpoints. I focused only on the funny characters, nice stories, and wonderful theme music that makes me remember it.
I was at disney on Saturday and took into account the reading and how it played in to me analyzing the reading. I found it very interesting about the different types of people and ages that are attracted to disney. Even if it was the children that were so called having the "most fun" the adults could definitely find memories of their own, such as Mickey mouse in the 1960's, and so on. I think disney has created a hook. In the reading he talks about how Disney looks to capitalize on the children while stealing the money from the adults. This means that disney has the whole family instantly involved with the company. This is a amazing marketing plan that disney has used to become so popular.
My grandparents celebrated there 60th anniversary this weekend. They were not attracted to disney to bring up past memories of such cartoon characters.Disney is able to attract the adults throughout the food, accommodations, and entertainment. With hotels like the Grand Floridian, they are more than just a amusement park hotel, they are comparable to nearly every other luxury hotel that Orlando has to offer. They now have attracted nearly every age group of people. They have created a "world" where dreams come true for every generation of people.

This image shows how the adults win with expensive and top quality dining and the kids win by seeing a favorite character join them during the meal. The kids arnt focused on the meal while to adults are and vise versus. 

Poster/Jenkins pre class- fang

Mark Poster further develops the theses and thoughts put forth by Baudrillard, Zizek, Eco, and Dorfman in the critiquing of the new “hyperreality” in modern society. The new media paradigms have created a crutch for people that use the internet and other means of communication to simulate reality and real conversations. He states “virtual reality is a more dangerous term since it suggest that reality may be multiple or take many forms,” (445) like the previously stated theorists that warn of the dangers of the new digital age. He goes on to write about the new society that is embedded in the Internet.  The wave of digital media interfaces and replacements for genuine human contact have distorted the notion of what communication and reality are. Internet has provided what many feel is a substitution to reality through message boards and chat rooms. Poster concludes well saying “from the club that extends and replaces the arm to virtual reality in cyberspace, technology has evolved to mime and to multiply, to multiplex, and to improve upon the real” (451) explaining that the web toys with reality but many are starting to not see the difference.

Jenkins approaches the new virtual society differently. While some see the unique online community as a hindrance to culture, he sees it as an innovation in participatory culture. Utilizing Star Wars, he explains that tv and film producers can use the internet to see how their media texts resonate with their fans and the rabidity of the fans on the internet demonstrates their true love for the text as fan films illustrate “the unleashing of significant new tools which enable the grassroots archiving, annotation, appropriation, and recirculation of media content.” (454) As someone who actively enjoys How I Met Your Mother fan fiction or finds the Star Wars kid whimsical, I understand Jenkins point that there is an inherent good to what the internet offers.