The topic of my storify focuses on Alana and June Thompson, also known as Honey Boo Boo. This show is featured on TLC, and has received many negative comments against it. Highly critiqued for the "go-go" juice used in the show, to get Alana (7 year old) hyper before going on stage. Alana is a "larger" toddler, and only gets noticed because of her poor, hick family, unlike other girls in the pageants, who are acknowledged based on looks. Many people think this show is absolutely ridiculous, as it showcases that Alana never actually wins pageants, how she eats cheese balls for breakfast and stereotypes people living in southern United States. They first appeared on Toddlers and Tiaras on TLC, which is also highly criticized for showing young girls looking like older more sexualized women, and teaching them that beauty is the number one priority from a young age.
Take a look at my storify for more news, clips, tweets, Facebook posts and stories related to Honey Boo Boo.
http://storify.com/ToddlersTiaras2
Summative- New Journalism
When talking about citizen journalism, the main issue that rises is most people aren't actually participating, and if they are, the validity of the content is lost. The feedback I recieved followed this notion, as the first person said, he was more of a consumer than a producer. Social media provides us (people with access) the opportunity to comment and say what they want on news stories, which takes away from the journalists jobs who strive on being trustworthy and respectable. I feel, along with the second person commenting, that there is no real harm in sharing your opinion on events. We live in a place where everyone has the right to be heard equally, even if it is just how they feel about a news story. As long as people are aware of whose posting what, there is no harm. As colin (first person) said in his blog, and I agree with, in the end it comes down to money, which a lot of the topics in this class relate to. Twitter now has accounts for major newspapers, people have the news so easily accessible and at their fingertips. Which is convenaint for the "tweeters" but they are providing this in hopes that they click on the link, leading them to their website with their content. Technology, as mentioned isn't going anywhere anytime soon, so I agree that politicians will start using this to their advantage, as the second person said, we just need to be aware of the "forces at play". As social media progresses and people become more comfortable with it, perhaps we will see more producers commenting on events and putting their two cents into a topic. As for now, both consumers and the people providing the information seem to be happy, we get news quickly (what this generation is about) and they get their money.
When the bombing in Boston happened, I saw on twitter and Facebook people uploading pictures of possible suspects and men on rooftops, this is just an example of how, like Hermida (2012) said social media provides more eye witnesses in a crisis. I found this interesting, but like anything, going agaisnt the tradtional form of things is hard to do, but social media is providing an outlet to go agaisnt tradtional forms of journalism.
When the bombing in Boston happened, I saw on twitter and Facebook people uploading pictures of possible suspects and men on rooftops, this is just an example of how, like Hermida (2012) said social media provides more eye witnesses in a crisis. I found this interesting, but like anything, going agaisnt the tradtional form of things is hard to do, but social media is providing an outlet to go agaisnt tradtional forms of journalism.
New Journalism
This week we are talking about citizen journalism, I wasn’t too
clear on what this exactly was so I googled it (of course) and good old
Wikipedia showed up. Two definitions from Wikipedia stood out to me, because they
made citizen journalism make more sense. The first was "playing an active
role in the process of collecting, reporting, analyzing, and disseminating news
and information” (Bowman and Willis, 2003) and second "When the people
formerly known as the audience employ the press tools they have in their possession
to inform one another” (Rosen, 2012). With the rise of social media it is clear
that more people can openly discuss issues, such as the news freely and how
they see these topics. People are no longer to just listen to what others
think, they can express how they feel through social media. Social media
provides the opportunity to challenge traditional and formal journalism, but
with this comes consequences. As Hermida (2012) discusses the verification of
information, the truth and validity of a given topic that journalists claim
they have the ability to do is lost when the average person can post whatever
they please. Schudson and Anderson (2009) explain that journalist are able to
see reality of a situation, which gives them special authority over the news
but with new technology, taking pictures and having blogs these people are receiving
more and more credit along with creditably in what they post. Twitter has made
it possible for TV networks and newspapers to send a message instantly out to
the social media world, it is live broadcasts of the news (Hermida, 2012).
Another opportunity that has occurred because of social media and citizen
journalism is when a crisis or news event does happen, there are more eye
witnesses and people who can gather reports as events unfold in real time
(Hermida, 2012).
Even though I have social media accounts such as Twitter and Facebook, I would still say I am a consumer when it comes to citizen journalism. I read what other people have to say on news issues, and perhaps search through twitter when something big has happened, but I rarely comment on how I feel about a topic, or give my two cents. Again, I don’t think social media sites are going anywhere anytime soon, I believe they will keep evolving, therefore we should learn ways to embrace and use these sites for good. News events of all kinds draw millions of people worldwide, and the Internet gives everyone (who has access) the ability to discuss among themselves, as well as to provide other information about these events (Friedman, S. M. 2011).
Hermida, A. (2012). TWEETS AND TRUTH: Journalism as a discipline of collaborative
verification. Journalism Practice. 6:5-6, p659-668.
Friedman, S. M. (2011). Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima: An analysis of traditional and new media coverage of nuclear accidents and radiation. Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists, 67(5), 55-65.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism
Even though I have social media accounts such as Twitter and Facebook, I would still say I am a consumer when it comes to citizen journalism. I read what other people have to say on news issues, and perhaps search through twitter when something big has happened, but I rarely comment on how I feel about a topic, or give my two cents. Again, I don’t think social media sites are going anywhere anytime soon, I believe they will keep evolving, therefore we should learn ways to embrace and use these sites for good. News events of all kinds draw millions of people worldwide, and the Internet gives everyone (who has access) the ability to discuss among themselves, as well as to provide other information about these events (Friedman, S. M. 2011).
Friedman, S. M. (2011). Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima: An analysis of traditional and new media coverage of nuclear accidents and radiation. Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists, 67(5), 55-65.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism
Podcast
This week I tried out a new way of blogging, called sound blogging! I really enjoyed it. I discuss the issues surrounding children's beauty pageants by reading an article than further discussing it. Click on the link below to listen!
Sound Blog
https://soundcloud.com/toddlers-tiaras/childrens-beauty-pageants
Article
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=126315&page=1#.Uc-ULJrD_IU
Sound Blog
https://soundcloud.com/toddlers-tiaras/childrens-beauty-pageants
Article
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=126315&page=1#.Uc-ULJrD_IU
Summative - Piracy
This
week we focused on piracy in the music industry. What surprised me the most is
how serious of an issue this is, I honestly hadn’t thought about it much
before. Perhaps because people do it constantly and in the “privacy” of their own
home (so we don’t see this crime happening) is why I wasn’t as aware of this
issue. Also, because in most cases the product isn’t directly in our hands
(like stealing from a mall) people may not believe the crime is as bad.
Whatever the reason, until reading these articles I didn’t see piracy as such
an offensive crime, but they have changed my mind and it is stealing. The four motivations,
although they make sense, in the end it is still going against the law. I have
watched a pirated movie, and listened to pirated music before, so I am at fault
as well. Just like some of the articles said, people say contradictions (just
like I did) I know it is illegal and I see the reasoning behind the laws, but I
have still participated in these actions (although a lot less than others). The
other thing that surprised me is how most weeks, the topic always dwindles down
to be about money. I guess it’s true that the world revolves around money,
especially when it comes to the new technologies. Every company is searching on
how they can make the most profit and every individual is searching for how to
save a quick dollar. The culture vs. commons articles from last week relate
really well to this week, as people discussed that in the digital industry,
music and film are there to be shared amongst the community, while large corporations
have a different opinion. The laws and regulations are made by a small group of
people that then affect a much larger group of people (I’m finding this to be
true in a lot of aspects of life). When it comes to piracy, I think it will
continue to be a vicious circle, companies will continue to make laws and
enforce them, while people will continue to break these laws and find
entertainment for themselves for less or even free. It is going to remain with
the us against them world of capitalism.
Music Piracy
The
music industry like any other wants to make profit. Money, Money, Money is the
main goal for large corporations, like I had previously talked about in Culture
vs. Commons. A small group of individuals make the decisions regarding
everyone. After reading these articles, I would say the main reason piracy
happens is for just that reason, the inability to afford the content. Even if
people can afford the content, if you could get it for free, wouldn’t you? In my
own experiences, I’m not a huge music person, but if I ever put music on my iPod
or made a CD, it came from other peoples laptops, who downloaded it illegally
through itunes or limewire. The only person I know who buys their itunes music
is my Dad (lol) and I’m pretty sure he just doesn’t know how else to do it.
Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell (2013) describes digital piracy as ‘‘the illegal act of copying digital goods, software, digital documents, digital audio (including music and voice), and digital video for any reason other than to backup without explicit permission from and compensation to the copyright holder’’. I think this definition explains the rules and laws to protect copyright and prevent piracy. I must say before reading these articles I hadn’t really thought about music piracy as a criminal act, because it is so easily accessible and almost everyone I knew participated in it, it didn’t cross my mind that it is illegal. What I found most interesting about Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell (2013) article was the four motivations for engaging in piracy, (1) to share culture=content, (2) to sample, (3) the inability to afford content and (4) to undermine the current copyright regime. Many people believe that data is put out there to be shared amongst everyone, also no one wants to purchase something and then find out that they don’t like it or aren’t interested in it, so they sample the music beforehand. As I mentioned above, Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell (2013) state that 41 percent of the participants said they can’t afford the content and this is why they “steal” it. Others simply don’t support the recent industry, as they are making the money, not the artists. I found it extremely interesting that people said if they could directly pay the artist they would, instead of having to pay these large corporations. They want to cut out the middleman, and support the music artist, the talent, I don’t think that this would ever work, as these companies pay big bucks to market the material, but nonetheless it is a cool concept to think about.
The internet (as we learn in this class) is becoming a large commons, and a place where everything can be shared for everyone to hear. In some cases it is making life easier, cheaper as information is becoming more easily accessible. Even though this is the case for the internet and its users, I have to agree with McCourt, T., P. Burkart. (2003) that this won’t cause record companies to go under, although it provides new challenges against piracy laws, it can also benefit them as they can buy and sell and create packages for online consumers. The article talks about using subscriptions to make more money because they are paid in advance and while they encourage heavy users, they also make money off people who only visit once in a while.
As I said before, I don’t really participate at all in music piracy, I’m not the most tech-savvy and didn’t really have the time or interest to download music to “sample” for myself. Therefore the laws against music piracy don’t directly affect me, but that being said from reading these articles I think the companies (Big Five) should make a better attempt at pleasing the consumers. Perhaps focus on the people buying the products rather than just how much money is being made through the process.
References
McCourt, T., P. Burkart. (2003). When Creators, Corporations and Consumers Collide: Napster and the Development of On-line Music Distribution. Media, Culture & Society. 25 (3), pg. 333-350
Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell (2013). Under the Pixelated Jolly Roger: A Study of On-Line Pirates. Deviant Behavior. 34 (1), pg. 53-67
Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell (2013) describes digital piracy as ‘‘the illegal act of copying digital goods, software, digital documents, digital audio (including music and voice), and digital video for any reason other than to backup without explicit permission from and compensation to the copyright holder’’. I think this definition explains the rules and laws to protect copyright and prevent piracy. I must say before reading these articles I hadn’t really thought about music piracy as a criminal act, because it is so easily accessible and almost everyone I knew participated in it, it didn’t cross my mind that it is illegal. What I found most interesting about Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell (2013) article was the four motivations for engaging in piracy, (1) to share culture=content, (2) to sample, (3) the inability to afford content and (4) to undermine the current copyright regime. Many people believe that data is put out there to be shared amongst everyone, also no one wants to purchase something and then find out that they don’t like it or aren’t interested in it, so they sample the music beforehand. As I mentioned above, Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell (2013) state that 41 percent of the participants said they can’t afford the content and this is why they “steal” it. Others simply don’t support the recent industry, as they are making the money, not the artists. I found it extremely interesting that people said if they could directly pay the artist they would, instead of having to pay these large corporations. They want to cut out the middleman, and support the music artist, the talent, I don’t think that this would ever work, as these companies pay big bucks to market the material, but nonetheless it is a cool concept to think about.
The internet (as we learn in this class) is becoming a large commons, and a place where everything can be shared for everyone to hear. In some cases it is making life easier, cheaper as information is becoming more easily accessible. Even though this is the case for the internet and its users, I have to agree with McCourt, T., P. Burkart. (2003) that this won’t cause record companies to go under, although it provides new challenges against piracy laws, it can also benefit them as they can buy and sell and create packages for online consumers. The article talks about using subscriptions to make more money because they are paid in advance and while they encourage heavy users, they also make money off people who only visit once in a while.
As I said before, I don’t really participate at all in music piracy, I’m not the most tech-savvy and didn’t really have the time or interest to download music to “sample” for myself. Therefore the laws against music piracy don’t directly affect me, but that being said from reading these articles I think the companies (Big Five) should make a better attempt at pleasing the consumers. Perhaps focus on the people buying the products rather than just how much money is being made through the process.
References
McCourt, T., P. Burkart. (2003). When Creators, Corporations and Consumers Collide: Napster and the Development of On-line Music Distribution. Media, Culture & Society. 25 (3), pg. 333-350
Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell (2013). Under the Pixelated Jolly Roger: A Study of On-Line Pirates. Deviant Behavior. 34 (1), pg. 53-67
Which would you prefer?
Here's a look at a video about the negative aspects of children's beauty pageants. I used Mozilla popcorn to create it!
Take a look and tell me what you think!
http://popcorn.webmadecontent.org/15pq
Take a look and tell me what you think!
http://popcorn.webmadecontent.org/15pq
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)