Biology 105 Introduction

Hello BIO class.

My name is Luke Singer.  There's a picture of me on my profile tab, I won't frighten you off with a larger one.

I was raised in Flagstaff, and each year keep rolling further down the hill.  I am currently living in Cottonwood, although hopefully not too much longer, the beach in San Diego is calling to me.

The last book I read was Mockingjay, Book 3 of the Hunger Games series.  I read that one because it followed Book 2... ;)  I'm currently reading Pronto by Elmore Leonard.  It's the book that  inspired the FX series Justified, so I'm going to check it out.

Two things to know about me, um, I'm very sarcastic.  That doesn't always work well in online settings, but take anything I say or type with a grain of salt.  I will hopefully be getting my Associates degree this spring, so I need to do my best to not fail Biology.  ::fingers crossed::

My course of study is in Arts, mostly because that was the quickest degree to get after factoring previous credits from my first college foray.

Good luck to everyone in class, especially me. ;)

Global Flow of Visual Culture

Perhaps some of the easiest visual culture that can be compared in modern times is media coverage in China. In 1989, after months of peaceful protesting by civilians in Beijing, the Chinese government ordered the protesters moved out of Tiananmen Square. Hundreds, and perhaps thousands of protesters were killed by the Chinese army. During this time, China imposed a media blackout, including foreign news stations. Word was eventually leaked out, and several hours later news stations around the world began reporting what was happening, although the details were murky, and pictures were blurry and scarce. It took weeks for full details to leak, and the full story of why the violence escalated and number of casualties may never be fully disclosed.

20 years later, riots once again rocked parts of China. However, with the advent of the internet, social media sites, and cell phones, eyewitness accounts were available almost immediately. Any attempt at a media blackout by the government was circumvented by people's ability to access the internet, and post their footage. The following footage is of riot police confronting protestors. This footage was taken with a camera phone, and posted to the internet.

In the modern world of immediate global communication it will probably be impossible to attempt to cover up any kind of large scale incident anymore. This leads to new issues though, as more people than ever have the ability to manipulate footage, and therefore global opinions. This could easily be used to spread misinformation, which in turn could have dire consequences.

It will be fascinating to see how this instant media plays out and affects our "global village".

Celebrity Privacy

Fame has truly become a two-edged sword in the 21st Century. For most of the last century the only time you heard about celebrities private lives was if something truly sensational happened, otherwise they got to live highly private lives out of the public spotlight. In our era of global communication however, there is no hiding from the spotlight, and the glare of the bright lights will be on you 24 hours a day. This is the cost of fame, and while some embrace it, others find it difficult to deal with. On top of this, there are those who try to take advantage of any potentially offensive action by a celebrity.

Two recent examples that come to mind are from relatively young celebrities. In one case I think the criticism was entirely valid, and the other incident appears to be more of a case of someone trying to profit off of a celebrity's fame and fortune. In 2010 Kristen Stewart made a comment to British Elle magazine, comparing the constant attention of paparazzi to "being raped". This was clearly an ignorant statement, and one that many found highly offensive. After all rape victims have no choice, Kristen Stewart made the decision to pursue a career that lead to her private life being on display. Stewart later apologized for the comments.




In February of 2009 a picture surfaced of Miley Cyrus posing for a photograph with several friends. She appears to be making her eyes slant upwards, a gesture usually associated with imitating an Asian person. This caused an uproar among some Asian communities, and a 4 billion dollar class action lawsuit was brought against Cyrus for 'discrimination'. In this case I think you would have to make a much more compelling argument than a picture of a 16-year old girl posing for a private photo with a group of friends, one of whom appears to be Asian, as a basis for being offended. Cyrus of course apologized if she offended anyone, and a judge later dismissed the law suit.



So while the price of fame means a loss of privacy, if you are choosing to profit from this fame, then I don't think you have a forum for complaining about your lack of privacy. However, I think that there should be more respect for people's private lives. I don't think that will happen anytime soon without drastic changes in our society.

Responding To Rumors

A challenge facing all companies, and even individuals, in the world of instant worldwide communication is how to respond to rumors or slander. Where one person sending out an email to a small circle of friends can become a firestorm of misunderstanding and false information, it is important to know what the appropriate response should be to try and quell rumors. In the example listed in our Mass Communication text book, a Marine Sergeant sent out an email to ten of his friends, asking them to join him in a boycott of Starbucks because he had heard they "did not support the war in Iraq". This e-mail quickly spread, and it became a big enough issue that Starbucks was compelled to make a public statement on the matter. In this case I think it was an appropriate response, and if they had not taken these steps Starbucks could have unfairly lost customers.

Of course as evidence that bad news travels fast, the original author of the Starbucks rumor later sent out a new email apologizing for the misinformation, but that did not get nearly the amount of circulation that the false rumor did.

This kind of rumor has been going on for years, and often times it can actually be tied back to competing companies. In the early 1980's a rumor began circulating that the company Proctor and Gamble were being managed by avowed Satan worshippers, and the President of P&G even went on the Donahue show and confirmed that this was true. Of course this outraged many people in the United States as many of them were appalled at the idea that they could be contributing to the Church of Satan by buying Proctor and Gamble products. As proof, people were quick to point out the 666, the sign of the devil, in the P&G logo.

 
While one would think that something so absurd would be laughed off, instead the rumor gained traction. In the 1990's the talk show changed from Donahue to the Sally show, but the basic rumor stayed the same, that the board members of Proctor and Gamble were members of the Church of Satan, and every time you bought their products, you were contributing directly to them. Interestingly enough Proctor and Gamble later sued Amway, a company that made competing products, for defamation, and a jury rewarded P&G 19.7 million dollars for damages, due to recorded evidence given that Amway was helping to at least perpetuate the rumors.

While Proctor and Gamble never made a direct statement to the public regarding the rumors, I think in this case that was also the prudent course. The time period it first occurred in did not have the immediate global communication we have now, and it would have probably done more harm than good to possibly legitimize these accusations by feeling the need to defend yourself against them.

The Importance of Brands

I had to think about this for a while, as I have tried to make an active move away from being 'brand loyal' for quite some time now. As I thought about it however, I recalled one brand that does stand out in particular for me. Tor is a book publisher, that specialized in science-fiction and fantasy novels. While I would not say that I am brand loyal in that I never read anything other than Tor books, if something catches my eye and I discover it was published by Tor then I am more than willing to take a chance on purchasing the book without waiting to find reviews on the book to see if it's actually worth reading or not. 
Over the last 20 years, I would guess my satisfaction level with purchasing a variety of books simply because they carried the Tor logo to easily be around 90%, so I would consider myself to be content with that facet of brand loyalty.

If I'm feeling overwhelmed by choices...

this logo will definitely influence my purchasing decision.

This contrasts with my attitude towards pretty much any other 'brand' name, such as clothes, shoes, electronics, etc. My parents were very much brand loyalists, and there was not a single electronic item in our house that was not a Sony. After getting some real world experience I quickly found out that while Sony is an almost overwhelming brand name, they are usually not overwhelmingly superior products, and are often times much more expensive that competing brands, simply because they know people will pay the 'loyalty' tax. In fairness Sony products are usually good quality, and there's nothing wrong with them, but the 'bang for the buck' factor is what could be viewed as a shortcoming.

Pottermore

The Internet is in a constant state of flux, as everyone is out to try to do their best to commercialize the medium, and make it profitable. One of the more interesting attempts that will be unveiled in the near future is a collaborative effort by J.K. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter series of books, and Sony. Rowling is creating a new website called Pottermore (http://www.pottermore.com). It is expected to be open to the public by the end of the year, as right now it is still in a beta phase. Essentially Pottermore is taking every chapter of every Harry Potter book, and letting you explore the chapter through illustrations and more in-depth details by Rowling. Along with the extra details, as you progress through the story chapters, you also unlock different collectibles that you can store in your online 'trunk'. You eventually earn a wand, and learn spells. The purpose of the collectibles is to use in mini-games that you play on the website with other members of the community. You can interact with other members of Pottermore like any other kind of social site, as you have friends lists, message boards, and games you can play with others. You can share pictures and drawings, and talk about all things Harry Potter.

While the page is still in beta, and therefore not open to the public, here are a couple of basic screenshots from my beta account that give an idea of the layout of the page, and the kind of extra details you can find about the books. (Click for larger versions).

 Of course you will also eventually be able to use the site to buy Harry Potter merchandise and for a while will be the exclusive place you will be able to legally get the e-book versions of the Harry Potter books. In all, it is an ambitious endeavor to bring a traditional medium to the internet, and make it something more than just reprinting the pages of the book on a webpage. While it will be sometime before we see what the end result will be, it provides a glimpse to the kinds of things that can be accomplished on the internet in bringing new life to old mediums.

Earthquake in Slow Motion

Ken Auletta references to an "earthquake in slow motion" has to do with the changing television landscape. For decades the choice people had on television was NBC, CBS, or ABC. In bigger cities you might also have access to a few local broadcast channels, but any show or even of importance would be televised on one of the Big 3 networks. This model had been largely unchanged until the Fox network decided to take aggressive steps to get on equal footing with the Big 3. Founded in 1986, Fox began a gradual climb into television relevance. After several years of building a steady base of affiliate networks, Fox made its presence felt for good by acquiring rights to broadcast NFL games in 1993. With the firm foothold in 18-49 demographics, the network continued to climb in popularity, and by 2007 became the most viewed of the new Big 4 networks.

The earthquake continued for the original Big 3 networks with the rise of cable companies that were able to produce cheaper shows, and also get paid for the broadcast rights, which was the opposite financial model that the Big 3 networks were using. While the Big 3 pay for rights to broadcast a show, and hope to recoup their investments by selling advertising spots, cable channels get paid by cable carriers, thus ensuring a steady source of income. This allows cable channels to take more risks for programming content, which attracts more diverse viewers. While the Big 4 still routinely draw more viewers due to their wider availability, it takes many more viewers for one of their shows to be considered a 'hit'. This of course leads to the networks not taking chances on new content, opting instead to stick with familiar shows that routinely draw viewers, such as crime procedurals, sitcoms, and reality shows. While this approach may work for the short term, I would imagine that unless there is a major shift in their financial model, the Big 4 will cease to exist in their current format.

As an example of the programming that the Big 4 networks find themselves obliged to carry in an effort to keep their numbers up, here's their Fall 2011 promotional lineup.

 
Contrast this with HBO's promotional reel (from 6 years ago, as I couldn't find a more current one that was sharable within the blog).


 

Which channel would you rather watch?