social media and the 2008 election

After reading Naomi Klein's article "How Corporate Branding Took Over the White House", I thought back to the previous election in 2008. I remember hearing from teachers and parents that the teenagers of my generation was becoming surprisingly involved in political and economic debates and causes. I think a lot of that had to due with the fact that our generation had grown up during a particularly contentious time in American history; we experienced 9/11, the subsequent War on Terror and the collapse of the housing bubble, fracturing our economy. A lot of kids in my high school had parents who would ultimately lose their jobs in the fallout. George Bush was unfortunate enough to have all of these miseries occur during his presidency. Now to his credit, Bush did try to deal with the ensuing chaos to the best of his abilities, but a lot of the policies he enacted were undeniably flawed and inevitably controversial, both at home and abroad.

At the end of Bush's presidency America was divided internally and mocked globally. We DID need a change, and America DID need a rebranding. As I said before, teenagers were invested in the upcoming election to a scale never seen before in history, and Barack Obama was well aware of this, much more so than McCain appeared to be.

Obama's campaign was very much influenced by the grassroots movements of the 60s. His campaign was the first to employ social media, using Facebook, Twitter and other sites to develop a strong following among the coveted youth vote. Obama also formed alliances with a number of film and music stars, such as Will Smith and Will.i.am, which also increased his loyalty amongst American youth. Will.i.am in particular ended up being one of Obama's biggest supporters, producing both the "Yes We Can" video mentioned in Klein's article as well as a second video called "We Are The Ones", which similarly featured a number of celebrities discussing their vision of an ideal America against a chant of "O-ba-ma! O-ba-ma!" in the background. I've included links below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghSJsEVf0pU - "We Are The Ones"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY&feature=related - "Yes We Can"

Hell, the article even reminded me about all those "hip" Obama ringtones I heard emanating from so many cell phones that summer, downloaded from official websites. You would never hear an "official" George W. Bush ringtone, although there were plenty of humorous "Bushisms" ripped from television interviews for people to laugh at, such as the ones listed below:

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm

My point is that Obama connected to youth culture on a level no president ever had before. For all the accusations of social media being impersonal, it felt incredibly personal back in 2008. Instead of waiting for us to come to him, like other presidents would, Obama made an incredible effort in coming to us, and it worked.

Brand *bleep*

    As I read the articles for this week, it was so evident that at times I am a brand whore and I am completely OK with that. I believe that if you like a brand and CAN AFFORD a brand you should have it. The biggest thing though, is being able to afford the brand. I would never purchase a brand knowing that it would seen me straight to the poor house. For me, there are certain things I buy that must be brand name such as: shoes (specifically sneakers), electronics, and some foods. However, my mother believes that every food item she purchases MUST be brand name. There have been times I called my mother a food brand whore or sidity (bourgeois). My mother is an amazing cook and when she cooks people stalk our house for whatever she prepared. 
     Last Thanksgiving, I was sent to buy heavy whipping cream for her famous homemade vanilla ice cream and well I picked up the Great Value (Walmart) brand priced at $3 a quart. When I got home, you would have thought I committed a heinous crime. As she mixed all the ingredients and taste tested the mixture, she swore that it didn't taste right simply because I bought the wrong brand. After a comical argument, I told her she was crazy and that the cream was made from the same milk milked from the same cow that Dean's used. The next time she made her ice cream she purchased the name brand cream that was $5 a quart and according to her taste buds, her ice cream tasted heavenly. 
     Although, I believe my mother's belief about branded foods is naive, I do understand that it is something we program ourselves to believe. If a item is not branded with a name we trust and know, we believe that it is an imitation and of lower quality. When I got in college and moved into my own apartment, I removed that naivety from my life because I couldn't afford the higher priced brands anymore. I learned to read and compare name brand items to the store brand and ultimately realized they were the same damn thing. Recognizable brands make people feel like they're a part of a community and sadly they will go broke trying to fit in.

Children and Brands

It’s official: corporations are evil geniuses.

At least I think they are, having read this week’s articles about children and brand awareness.

Making kiddie versions of adult products? Retail field trips? Exposing children enough so they can make assumptions about brands and the people who associate with them? All of these are done in an attempt to build brand loyalty at an early age, so that when they grow up and they have their own money to spend, they might as well spend it on the same products that they’re familiar with.

It seems kind of wrong. But it works.

It reminds me of a paper I wrote about the popularity of fast food back when I took ENG 104. One of the reasons why people enjoy fast food so much, I hypothesized, is because companies like McDonald’s suck you in as children and keep hold of you for practically your whole life. Everything about McDonald’s is tailored to kids: the food, the toys, the play areas, the bright colors, the charming characters. (“Charming” is completely subjective.) You automatically associate McDonald’s with happiness and good memories, even after you’re too old to eat a Happy Meal. But you can still buy Happy Meals for your children. And the cycle begins again.

Of course, this isn’t just limited to fast food. Noel Paul’s article mentions crazy-colored Heinz ketchup, Tommy Hilfiger clothes on dolls, kiddie versions of magazines, and Harley Davidson toys for tots. Joanne Bichman, HD’s VP, doesn’t deny what her company is trying to do, saying that they’re trying to “imprint” kids “with the positive aspects of the brand.”

You become a lifelong customer without even knowing it, which is actually pretty scary if you think about it too much.

But some might even call it genius. 

Mom Jeans

This whole idea of "cool" and "coolhunters" has really got me thinking. Especially about the type of fashion I am in to. Whenever we talked about styles going in and out, like neon for example, the one style that kept popping into my mind is the high waist mom jeans style. I remember back in middle school and high school, when I lived at home, I always made fun of my mom for wearing high waist shorts or pants, said she looked like a dork. She would always come back with some remark about how much more comfortable they were than wearing low rise jeans that almost show your butt crack, which were in style at the time. Now what is funny to me is that I wear high waist mom jeans religiously. They may be my favorite type of pants at the moment. I enjoy wearing them much more than any of my low rise bottoms. I also know that many other girls would agree with me. They are the "cool" style right now. This style obviously went in and out of a style for quite some time but the "coolhunters" saw it rising within the past two years which I am happy about. I don't know what I would do without my high waist shorts. :)

Is dubstep still cool?

After being assigned a story for the Daily News regarding "the history of dubstep culture", it's almost inevitable to ignore the connection between the studies of the myths of counterculture and the bass heavy genre that started off as just that, a counterculture.

Before becoming commercialized and extremely prominent here in the states, the movement has almost transformed in to the complete polar opposite from that of it's somewhat dark origins. It all began within the underground music scene of South London. The fathers of this genre were basically taking a similar pre existing form of electronic music entitled "drum & bass" and slowing it down, creating what has now been dubbed "dubstep". The culture surrounding the genre was similar to that of the grunge fad that came out of Seattle. Followers and early adapters of the counterculture sported that  alternative look that consisted of button down flannels, ripped washed up skinny jeans, and pretty much anything similar to something Kurt Cobain would've worn.

Before it was cool (or perhaps "when" it was cool?):

At this moment in time, dubstep was so new, and so different that no one really wanted anything to do with it simply due to the fact that no one really knew how to react to it. Before the 'early majority' crowd got on board, people viewed it as this weird act where "geeky" musically inclined computer nerds got together and got off by making weird alien type noises with extra heavy bass leads, and then spinning these tracks at some hole in the wall venue that probably almost nobody has heard of. Like any new fresh fad being born, there will always be the early doubters. And just like Gladwell states in that article "The Coolhunt", "..cool is something you can't control, you need someone to find cool and tell you what it is". That's exactly what was going on, the counterculture had been born but no one knew or felt that it was cool yet. Unless you're one of the innovators of a fad, people need other "cool" people to let them know what is "cool" and what isn't. What gave the dubstep culture this kick, was Londons' corporate radio.

When BBC radio DJ Mary Anne Hobbs gave a attention to the newly found counterculture on a national circuit across the UK, the fad really took off and started snowballing a lot faster than probably anyone ever predicted (other than Jim Morrison...). Dubstep night clubs started appearing in New York, San Fransico, and even Tokyo, and Barcelona. Britney Spears started sampling it in some of her radio friendly pop tunes, commercials started using it, and corporate america really just embraced the whole fad as a whole once they took note of the youth catching on.

American producers started revitalizing the genre to make it more dance oriented and this in turn, effected the fashion that went a long with the genre.

When corporate America got it's hand on dubstep culture, it took the genres previous crowd of intellectual social outcasts and completely flopped it. Concert goers now dub dubstep concerts as "raves" and sport wardrobes similar to those found on Halloween. Girls dress up in multi neon colored outfits, and the guys where thins as far out as Mario costumes or maybe nothing but a trash bag, "stunna" shades, and unnecessary amount of glow-sticks as necklaces and bracelets. Dubstep concert attendance is higher than anything else, selling out stadiums, putting on larger than life works of LED lighting, pyrotechnics, and technology. DJs have now been dubbed the new modern day rock star.

After corporate America embraced it:

So the question is, is dubstep still cool? According to the ideologies of Gladwell on cool hunting, it's not, and hasn't been for the past couple years now. It as already been discovered and commercialized; once something cool has been discovered, it is no longer cool. The bigger question is what's next? What will be the cool new genre/fad after dubstep?

Converse

After all this talk today, it made me realize that I don't really notice how much the way other people dress and think affect me. For example, I work at Scotty's Brewhouse and starting October 2nd we are required to black converse sneakers. We absolutely cannot wear anything else. Everyone knows converses are not cheap so I thought I would ask my boss if we could get a knock off brand of these shoes. Surely this wouldn't be an issue. To my surprise we are strictly suppose to wear legitimate converse sneakers. WHY! Now my job is transforming me into a hipster? Or whatever people are called that wear these shoes. I don't mind them, but I don't think it is right that they are making us wear them. I remember in my interview my interviewer telling me that a great thing about working at Scotty's Brewhouse is the individuality the workers have and how laid back it is. Now we are all suppose to wear black shirts, black belts and black chuck taylors. The other waitresses and I joke about how we are going to wear non-prescription glasses so we can fit the "hipster" stereotype better. We just can't get away from this evolving "coolness" I guess.

Corporate Culture Infiltrates Counter Culture? Or the Other Way Around?

I’m taking a low-level Political Science course this semester and the other day the professor started off the class by playing a song by protest singer Phil Ochs. I wasn’t familiar with Ochs and the professor described him as “Bob Dylan if he didn’t sell out.” Then we’re assigned the Thomas Frank article for #bsupop dealing with sellouts and the New Left and I couldn’t tell which class I was reading for anymore.

I’m a huge Bob Dylan fan, but I’d never so much as heard of Phil Ochs, which is a shame. If Bob Dylan hadn’t “sold out” then I wouldn’t have come to enjoy his music. I might have heard the name once in a Political Science class and that would be that.

Looking at the blend of mainstream and counter cultures, I tended to default to the idea that the ad agencies and “corporate types” were the shady ones who infiltrated the counter culture and commercialized it, selling it back to people who have taken on that counterculture as a style, not a way of life. Frank says that that revitalized American business along the way.

I’m starting to think differently about it now. Maybe that infiltration comes from both sides until mainstream and counter culture is blended, each “side” believing they’re the ones who have come out ahead.  Take Lady Gaga, she could be a “sellout” in the sense that she brings in immense amounts of money through her work as a performer, but she’s also stuck to her original “be yourself” message and put her money where her mouth is in terms of being… well… weird. Sellout or not, this has enabled her to send her message all over the world. Along the same lines, Apple Inc. likes to paint themselves as liberators and their competitors as lemmings droning on to their deaths (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYP1Tjgt1Ao), but they do make great computers that could be used as tools for some sort of informational liberation… at a high price, of course.

A Positive Effect of Social Media

While lying in my bed and watching the news on television a few days ago, I saw something that really caught my attention. A news story was shared about a young boy by the name of Lane. Lane has cancer and isn’t expected to live much longer. He doesn’t get out and about much because he’s often too sick to do so, but one thing that has really kept Lane’s spirits high is the availability of social media to him. Lane has received a bunch of support and encouragement through social networking, specifically facebook. On facebook, there is a group page dedicated to support Lane and encourage him that he will heal. This has really had a positive effect on Lane because although he is sick and knows his time is limited, it has been very comforting to Lane to know he has such a broad support group. I found it interesting that social media was having such a positive effect on his life. In a few readings, and also among class discussion, their seemed to be many who agreed that social networking was hurting activism, by causing loose ties and building fake relationships, but Lane’s story is an example of just the opposite! Social media was the best form of activism for Lane in his condition and allowed him to build relationships with people he may have never known otherwise. It opened his eyes to how wide his support system was and made him feel cared for, and loved. Social media gave this young boy a sense of worth in the world.

Conquest of cool-counter culture and mainstream culture

Am I apart of counterculture or am I predominantly a part of mainstream culture. The entire time in class today while discussing these two concepts, It was as if I could not comprehend the differences between the two. Reason being is that to me, mainstream culture and counterculture seems to be the same; its as if there is a fine line between the two. What I mean by this is if you look at a lot trends and lifestyle today, they are counterculture, but at the same time they are in fact mainstream culture also because that is what a lot of people is gravitating to, and in turn making it okay. I remember In Jamaica at one point where wearing cut-off foot jeans (both men and women) was looked down on, however, soon after, they flooded the market because everyone started to wear them. It seemed as if it all happen over night. It became so popular that even organized events were named after cut-off foot jeans, and today it is still a big thing.

Mainstream culture is defined as "culture perceived to be the norm or traditional of society, and counterculture is the unconventional lifestyles of living mostly by like minded people who resist these norms by mainstream culture. These norms of society to me are not the norms anymore, but rather dominant ideas and trends that are being endorsed and followed.

It's cool to be uncool

In today's class and for the reading, Frank discussed how there is an obvious dichotomy between what we know as mainstream culture and what is counter culture.  In class, it was brought up that mainstream culture causes us to seek a counter culture, which then turns back into mainstream culture which then turns into a vicious cycle of what is to be known as mainstream cool and uncool.

The class discussion forced me contemplate in and outside of class what exactly it means to be a part of the mainstream or counter culture.  It seems as though the current style of our society is that mainstream culture relies on everyone feeling as though they are apart of an individualized, unique, group that rebels against "the man."  When thinking about things that seem to be "cool" and in style right now, images of hipsters in horn-rimmed glasses, girls in frumpy clothing knitting beside a cat, and nerdy chic come into mind.  I am sure that these individuals are not doing these things to be mainstream, but rather because it places them in an elitist group within the counter culture, or they just simply enjoy the style (the difference between which can be easily spotted).

When leaving class today, I giggled to myself as I saw so many students walking around campus in their skinny jeans, Toms, and edgy haircuts.  Until reading this article and thinking critically about what it means to be mainstream, I never noticed these students were anything out of the ordinary from what I generally see throughout my day.  However today it seemed that nearly everyone was doing their part to "stick it to the man" by wearing their own indie style of clothing or seemingly not caring what others thought.

In an age where it's hip to be square, these people are simply feeding into the mainstream culture and more importantly the corporations who are capitalizing on these articles of clothing and style.  These people who are trying to define themselves as unique and undefined are the people that are creating this mainstream culture that is to be "hipsters."  Already we are seeing these kinds of styles in all different department stores for all different ages.  It will only be a matter of time before mothers will be seen wearing "Bobs" and skinny jeans, when in which the fad of being a "hipster" will decline again back into something uncool. 

The Universe is Indifferent. Don Draper on Counterculture.

In the process of getting a vast majority of my-self complexes shattered today amidst a discussion on counterculture, current culture and the absolute lack of any relationship in-between them, I had a rare moment of clarity in which a resounding answer came to me.  Perhaps it was inspired by Mad Men being brought up, or perhaps I drew it from somewhere deeper—but I found the answer to counterculture and current culture.  Better yet, it’s expressed with one of my favorite Mad Men quotes of all time from episode eight, season one: The Hobo Code.  Not only is it a cool expression of the  concepts of counterculture and mainstream going head to head; Don Draper delivers a line that, in my opinion, is as close to perfect as you can get.  Here goes:

The situation: In Draper’s mistress Midge’s apartment. Don, ad man extraordinaire, is surrounded by a group of counterculture loving hippies.

Midge’s Friend:  Dig.  Ad man’s got a heart.

Midge:  The grown-ups are talking.

Midge’s Friend:  Don’t defend him.  [to Don] Toothpaste doesn’t solve anything.  Dacron sure as hell won’t bring back those ten dead kids in Biloxi. 

Don:  Neither will buying some Tokaj wine and leaning up against a wall in Grand Central pretending you’re a vagrant. 

Midge’s Friend:  You know what it’s like to watch all you ants go into your hive?  I wipe my ass with the Wall Street Journal.  Look at you.  Satisfied, dreaming up jingles for soap flakes and spot remover, telling yourself you’re free.

Don: Oh, my god. Stop talking and make something of yourself.

Midge’s Friend: Like you? You make the lie.  You invent want.  You’re for them. .. Not us.

Don: Well, I hate to break it to you, but there is no big lie.  There is no system.  The universe is indifferent.

That’s emphasis.  The home run.  The big idea.  There is no system.  The universe is indifferent.  Gladwell’s article, The Conquest of Cool, establishes that there isn’t a definable relationship between counterculture and cool.  That mix is reinforced by Draper’s quote, but let’s take it a step further.  I’ll say it’s near impossible to define a sustainable counterculture on a large scale or even an individual one—because there’s always another layer.  There’s always a smaller group or a smaller thought that does something different, that is then developed and then becomes dominate.   We can’t draw a line and say what is counterculture and what’s just current/mainstream culture.

On a large scale, take the entire college population over the last few years.  Who was the brave individual, that courageous PBR consuming person, who dug out their father’s Coke-bottle sunglasses and became the first hipster?  We don’t know.  But somehow it caught on.  The point though is that individual existed within a pre-existing culture.  He/she didn’t create a culture—they changed an already existing one.  Let’s be conservative and say that out of 20,000 college aged people there are 500 hipsters.  1 in 40.  Pretty scary stuff.  But I digress.  Those 500 people didn’t spontaneously become hipsters overnight.  They assimilated bits and pieces from their brave comrade and put their own spin on it, eventually creating what we call hipster.  But this isn’t a self-sustained model in an isolated environment.  New ideas come in, old ideas leave.  Mainstream culture even plays into it.  Imagine what a disappointment  to hipster nation it would be if the Vespa scooter had never been invented by mainstream culture.  And imagine how horrible it must have been when four years ago frat boys started wearing argyle prints too. 

The illustration between the first hipster and the hipster group is the same as between the hipster group and mainstream culture.  We simply can’t distinguish which is which and how the mix is shared.  Not to draw too extreme of a comparison, but think of a bowl of soup.  Yes there are noodles in it. And peas. And carrots.  And you can tell where one ends and another begins.  But when you take a random ladle full of soup out the bowl you’ll still have those noodles, peas and carrots in it.  And ifyou strain all the chunks out of the soup and just drink the broth, you can still taste the peas and the carrots.  They’ve been assimilated into the flavor. 

This goes with culture too.  We can pick out individuals, or even groups.  But we can’t tell where the cultural influences begin and end.  It’s impossible.  They all pick up bits of “flavor” from each other.  So to say that the counterculture goes in opposition of mainstream culture is impossible because it contributes to what is mainstream culture.  And we can’t distinguish which is which, because there isn’t a logical way to do it.  There are too many variables. 

This is even expressed within myself:

I don’t want to stick it to the man.  I want to be the man.  But by wanting to be the man, aren’t I sticking it to the group that wants to stick it to the man?  And if so, I’m still sticking it to the man.  I’m in a counterculture to counterculture by trying to be the symbol of mainstream.  So by being mainstream we’re countering the counterculture which is countering mainstream life.  What a mess, but there’s a point in this.  We can’t really counter something that we’re continuously influencing and is influencing us.    We can’t distinguish what makes us think that way or this way, or identify the bits and pieces that play into that perspective. It’s circular and anyway you think about it it’s a myriad of muck and thoughts that leaves us unable to draw the dividing line. 

The best part?  That cultural machine keeps going.

There is no system.  The universe is indifferent. 

What a F*&#ing Hipster

I am a hipster. It's something that I've had to come to terms with all my life. Now granted, there are people much worse than I. I'm not really one of those hipsters with their nose in the sky, boasting about their latest "discovered" band. When I was a kid, being the youngest in my family caused me to feel this constant need to fit in with the older crowd, which meant I had to play the part: a hipster. But that bad news is that I started early. Like, really early.

My siblings and cousins were a poor influence on me. At the age of 8, I bought my first Green Day CD. At age 10, I started shopping at Hot Topic instead of Hollister. But most of all... I started watching the OC religiously. It is my favorite show to this day, and it created a huge wave of hipsters. Me included. I bought a Princess Sparkles t-shirt at age 13. (For those of you who don't know who that is, go watch the OC.) In 2006, the "dorky" trend took over so naturally, I joined in.

Yes, those are fake glasses.

This is me in 2007. I'm wearing a Rocket Summer t-shirt (signed by Bryce Avery), red tights, a vest from goodwill and a bow headband, as well as those stupid rubber bracelet things. I am ashamed of this picture.

In 2008 came the "cool hat" vintage-look. This was my first profile picture on Facebook. I am a photographer (no really, I am) but this looks like it came straight out of an Urban Outfitters ad.

Another "cool hat" picture.

The next trend that came along was buying ugly clothes to seem cool. (Yes, I know that's dumb.) I would troll mainstream stores like GAP and Target looking for the ugliest thing I could find. And the summer of 2008, it was this sweater:

Hideous, right? Well, I thought it was gonna make me look like I wasn't trying so hard. But then of course, my cousin Mandy had to sweep in and take the hipster crown. She informed me that she had the same sweater as me. In my head I was like, "score!", but Mandy bought hers at a thrift store. She had won the hipster-off.

The worst thing is that I wasn't aware of my hipster nature until my brother informed me my freshman year of high school. But it still didn't stop, I just became more aware of it! Above is me in another planned outfit complete with Chucks and a vintage 50 mm camera. I disgust even myself.

Throughout high school, despite being on the speech/debate team and theatre and choir, I tried to mainstream and blend in, throwing away my hipster desires. Problem with that was, HIPSTERS BECAME COOL! Like, really popular! And I was screwed. So then I turned to the only other thing I could: I had to become the counterculture and make fun of them. It was easy for me because I secretly had the hipster in me. We even developed the phrase, "What a f#$%ing hipster..." whenever we saw "those people". Also, as fans of How I Met Your Mother, we were avid fans of the fart noise whenever someone got dangerously close to sounding like a hipster.

This is me at prom, in the most hipster place on earth, Mass Ave in Indianapolis. My friends and I decided to take "hipster pics" on this brick wall, and this was the result. Wanna know the funny thing? The only person who commented on this photo was my cousin Mandy who said she loved it (irony at its best).

I'm now making an effort to become less of a hipster and more of a real person. But there are times I fall to temptation.

Photographed in April, I'm wearing a cardigan with patches on the elbows, Toms (not Bobs), and of elusive skinny jeans.

And then there is the trip I took to the East coast where I felt entirely pressured to look on-point.

Think I did?

It was hard to sit through class on Monday because I knew that it was me that we were talking about. I hope everyone enjoyed my trip down memory lane. Maybe I'll bump into some of my fellow hipsters at the Muncie Goodwill (I'm there every week).

If anything, I hope this made you laugh or feel better about being a hipster.

How Not to be Cool

     The Thomas Frank reading could not have come at a better time! As I read it, I could not help but to think of how this article relates to the 2000s. In the article it discusses "the sixties" and the 90s, but the 2000s are truly a repeat of everything explained. More than anything, I focused on the definitions of "hip" discussed in this article simply because being hip is something people still strive for in this day in age.
      In the article, Andrew Ross defined the characteristics of hip, "'an essentially agnostic cult of style worship... advanced knowledge about the illegitimate'" (p. 13). The most important aspect of this "definition" for me was the term agnostic, which simply means unopinionated. As a dweller on a college campus, the number of hip people I see is astronomical. Everyone looks the same, dresses the same, talks the same, and the craziest thing is they all believe their sense of style of "original". Ball State's campus is over-ran by skinny jeans, Toms, fake glasses, piercings, tattoos, and Bieber-ish haircuts just to name a few, but like the article discusses this fake counterculture. Nothing about it is organic, it is a mass replication of what one considered to be "hip".
     At the very end of the article, Frank defined what hip meant for him in 2000, he states, "Today hip is ubiquitous as a commercial style, a staple of advertising that promises to deliver the consumer from the dreary nightmare of square consumerism" (p. 15). For me, 12 years later, this definition is relevant and telling of so much. How can one not be a part of the fake counterculture when the media tells us how to be? We're told how to dress. How to talk. The type of products we must own in order to be "hip" and ultimately placing us back into the dreary nightmare of square consumerism we were trying to escape.

Media and Culture! Weee...

So, I just finished reading the Conquest of Cool excerpt. How interesting!

Honestly, I'd never though about if culture created advertising norms, or if advertising created cultural norms. This article definitely stretched my mindset of this type of media.

The way I figure, advertising norms primarily come from culture. After all, how would the market know what is trendy and what will sell if that which they are selling were not already trendy? At the same time though, advertising can create culture because it is persuasive in nature.

Let's use this example. A guy in Missouri creates an awesome tee-shirt that, instead of zipping up and down the middle, goes diagonally from shoulder to waist. (Bear with me, even if it's really unrealistic.) Lots of his friends pick up the style, and eventually so does his community. It then become a cultural norm of the county.

Hollister discovers this trend as soon as it becomes 'trendy' within the county. They buy his idea, and begin marketing it. All of the sudden, it becomes a nationwide trend. There are thousands of people who now fit into this style group.

In this case, one man created a shirt which ended up reflecting the culture of his county. However, when it become nationally advertised, the advertisements created the culture all over the country.

Anyway, I though it was a really interesting thought. Similarly to how we can function both as rhetors and critics.

Facebook High

Re-reading the article "Is Facebook Making Us Lonely?" I am looking at it completely different. The first time I read it (when it was assigned) I thought it was basically a stupid article. I don't see loneliness as something that can be surveyed or measured, however apparently Mr. John Cacioppo has miraculously made this into a career. Anyways that doesn't matter, I still find the article's content rather questionable but I am not calling it's bluff just yet. The way I look at it is this article could have been a  hell of a lot shorter. Basically Facebook is an online high school, and people treat it exactly the same. Burke talks about how Facebook stalking only leads to skulking, but how so? If you are 'unpopular' via Facebook and you get jealous or lonely by seeing what everyone else is doing in their fun lives as recorded by status updates, pictures, wall-to-wall interactions, and so fourth; isn't that a bit pathetic? Yet the 'unpopular' Facebook crowd are the FB feins. You are asking for this self inflicted loneliness by signing on, and stalking. I know the article states this somewhere but it can't get anymore real; we create our own loneliness. Facebook will give you what you put into it, much like high school. The answer to your question, Stephen Marche, is no, Facebook is not making us lonely we are making us lonely. Maybe Facebook is even helping? In season 3 of Grey's Anatomy a man comes in for a full facial transplant, in order for you to be allowed to get the surgery you have to have a "support team" there for you during recovery. This man dealing with a very unattractive deformity to the face had no friends, no family, no one... except, an online blog where he and three other people- he has never met in real life- chats daily for hours. These people come to be his support team and they knew him better than I think I know my best friend. It's riveting. Can social networks play both sides; the isolater and the consolidator? 

Confessions of A Teenage Media Addict

This class has is becoming my very own MA (Media Addicts Anonymous). From the first week talking about our addictions, to fakebook, to the extremes of the extremes of parasocial relationships; you could really just call me a parasocial whore. Yes, yes, I was in fact the girl who finished 7 seasons ranging from 20-27 episodes per season, of Grey's Anatomy... in three weeks. Ashamed? No. Accomplished? Well, you could say that. I skipped work for Grey's, I took baths so I could set my laptop up on my toilet to watch Grey's, at one point I was willing to preform open heart surgery on my cat, if only my brother wouldn't have stepped in. I was- I am a Grey's fanatic. Sadly, this is not the only TV series that has swallowed me from the real world. Netflix is the creator of my problems. On Netflix I have fully finished series including: Cake Boss, Desperate Housewives, Teen Wolf, Make It Or Break It, How I Met Your Mother, Weeds (three times), Pretty Little Liars, and am previously stuck in the middle of Breaking Bad (thanks guys). However this, again, does not do me justice, on actual TV I am completely caught up with and watching weekly: Storage Wars, Face Off, Revenge, The Walking Dead, Two and A Half Men, Dance Moms, and The Pitch. This is not a joke. I have a problem, but I am not and will not seek help. I like my shows. 

This makes me wonder, when will the cultivation theory catch up with me? I am indeed a heavy user of numerous mediums. Media has totally taken over my life, but is this something I need to fix to live a normal life? I have Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Instagram, and an YouTube account. I have a MacBook Pro, iPhone 4s, Wii, Xbox, Nintendo, Dvd player, 39" Plasma, Gameboy DS, and a kindle. All used at least once a week, most much more, however I still seem to function as a normal person. I read IMDb daily to keep up with news, I haven't lost any friends due to my addictions, and I can tell you right now I am definitely not scared of our world. I consider my fears rational: needles, sharks, dying alone, and your typical Abraham Lincoln. Okay, okay, I admit that may not be normal, but you try having a reoccurring nightmare of good ol' honest Abe chasing you with a knife. It's whatever. 

Going on... I don't think I live a "fake" life on Facebook, but I certainly am a different person sitting behind the walls of my Twitter and Facebook worlds, as I am talking to you right now. Honestly, I have severely fell off my Facebook game as of late. However on Fb I am my mother's daughter, my Nana's grandchild, and all of my friend's mother's perfect friend to have. On Twitter it's a different front, I am your typical college kid and the movie/media guru of our time. These lives aren't "fake" or extremely dramatized, they are just the part of me I want you to see. My tumblr is basically an ode to Morgan Freeman... Speaking of, let's get into my many levels of parasocial relationships. Starting with Morgan, our relationship has been intimate and growing since a very young age of 12. You see, Morgan resembles my very favorite person put on this Earth, my Papa, only Morgan is African American and much more freckled. I can stand up and orally recite Morgan's entire biography found on IMDb. I can tell you what movie he is working on, and who he is working with, I can tell you I only need to see 26 more Freeman films to have watched everything he has had a role in (or narrated), and I will debate you until the day I die why The Shawshank Redemption is by far the best movie to ever hit theaters. Anyways, that's my most extreme parasocial relationship. My others include: Clint Eastwood, Meryl Streep, Anne Hathaway, and duh, my hubby, Patrick Dempsey. Trust me there are many more but why bore you any longer? Bye!

 

Social Media & Activism

Today I started reviewing each of the readings in preparation for the upcoming test.  When I first read the article “Small Change” a week or two ago I strongly agreed with Malcolm Gladwell’s argument.  I am not the biggest user of social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter and Pinterest.  While I have each of these sites I am not an active user nor would I consider myself to be addicted to any of them.  For this reason I originally agreed with Gladwells assessment of these social media sites as only having weak ties. I saw social media as not being able to lead to effective activism such as the example within the article of the four college students in North Carolina.  However, after attending lecture and also reading Biz Stone’s article on Twitter and Activism I would say that my opinion has changed quite a bit. 

I still believe that for the most part when it comes to Facebook people will like pretty much any cause even if it’s as silly as “If you're against Mondays like this picture!” However, I now see that there are more legitimate causes such as breast cancer awareness and other sites that raise money and spread the word in a way that without social networking sites would be impossible.   I do see now that these social networking sites can be used as a tool for real change too.  It was important for me to realize that the world has changed a lot since the times of the civil rights movement, so while that is what I saw as “real” activism it is not something that will be seen again in today’s world. 

 While there will still be sit ins, rally’s and riots, there will likely never again be a movement without some form of social media being used.  Strong or weak ties, the use of social media is a tool to get the word out about injustices and a way for people to share thoughts and opinions that they never would have been able to before.  To quote Biz Stones article, “Rudimentary communication among individuals in real time allows many to move together as one—suddenly uniting everyone in a common goal.  Lowering the barrier to activism doesn’t weaken humanity, it brings us together and it makes us stronger.”