The article "'Turd Ferguson' makes it to real Jeopardy'" is not newsworthy or relevant.
In the article, it talked about how a contestant answered the final jeopardy question with "What is the ballad of Turd Ferguson p.s. hi mom?" The article also had tweets from several people and their responses to the episode of jeopardy. People are saying that the contestant is their hero. Videos from the episode end with CNN saying that the response was a prank.
But how is this relevant? Yes it was funny to some viewers but this is not news. And the fact that the article was under the money section was unbelievable. I was astounded at why this is on one of the most "reliable" news publications.
Yes the article is true, has multiple views, and has room for dissent. But the article is not relevant to me. It is not local or will have an impact on my life in the long run. After reading the article I was asking myself questions like "so what?" which I guess makes the article have no explanation.
Another one of the big yardsticks that this article violated was the yardstick of enterprise. The article author was mainly reacting to what the contestant did and not investigating why or what her intentions were.
Overall, this article is for entertainment only and is not newsworthy.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/17/entertainment/turd-ferguson-jeopardy-feat/index.html
Friday, September 18, 2015
Thursday, September 17, 2015
Response to "Ellitist/Populist" by Nicole White
In Nicole's entry about ellitist and populist media, she talked about how we spoke about populist news companies.
Nicole said a lot about how being a populist company does not make you a bad company and yes, populist media companies are in it for the money and this doesn't make them bad companies. These types of companies want to make more money to reach different groups of audiences which is their main purpose. My theory is, the companies that are now populist started as elitist but figured out that that type of media with their magazine or newspaper company, could not make money.
Below is a link to the blog entry.
http://www.meme-queen-trash-horder.blogspot.com/2015/09/mr-millers-views-on-elitist-and.html
Nicole said a lot about how being a populist company does not make you a bad company and yes, populist media companies are in it for the money and this doesn't make them bad companies. These types of companies want to make more money to reach different groups of audiences which is their main purpose. My theory is, the companies that are now populist started as elitist but figured out that that type of media with their magazine or newspaper company, could not make money.
Below is a link to the blog entry.
Response to "Mass Communication" by Emma Pagni
I really like how Emma related the types of communication with primary and secondary sources. After reading this entry, I really thought about that and even went back to my notes to relate them together and now I feel like I have a completely new viewpoint of it. I also really liked how she related filters to distractions and impediments to disruptions.
I also wanted to address the part about decoding and internalization. Decoding is like the physical copy of the media: like the video, article, movie, book etc. And internalization is internal. Its just like comprehension and without it then the media is not considered mass communication.
Below is a link to the article.
I also wanted to address the part about decoding and internalization. Decoding is like the physical copy of the media: like the video, article, movie, book etc. And internalization is internal. Its just like comprehension and without it then the media is not considered mass communication.
Below is a link to the article.
Books
Books are one of the most influential medias of journalism. Without them, we would have no widespread literacy, no public education, there would have never been a Renaissance Era, and most importantly, there would be no journalism.
Before the first invention of books, a vast majority of society was illiterate. The only people who could read were the wealthy and people of power. A world like this would most likely have been very dull. I know that it would drive me crazy if I didn't know how to read or write. The very first people who started making printing press' were the Mesopotamians, Romans, Chinese, and Egyptians. China was in the lead with technology by 1040 CE when the creation of the movable type press was created. I feel like after this technological advance, China never really went back, they kept advancing and left everyone else in the dust. I thought that it was really interesting how we talked about the history of the type press' and how they relate to how knowledge is power. I really found the Pre-Gutenburg Era to be fascinating.
I really like how Miller explained the history of the printing press because it gave you a better view of how it evolved and how it has become what it is today.
Before the first invention of books, a vast majority of society was illiterate. The only people who could read were the wealthy and people of power. A world like this would most likely have been very dull. I know that it would drive me crazy if I didn't know how to read or write. The very first people who started making printing press' were the Mesopotamians, Romans, Chinese, and Egyptians. China was in the lead with technology by 1040 CE when the creation of the movable type press was created. I feel like after this technological advance, China never really went back, they kept advancing and left everyone else in the dust. I thought that it was really interesting how we talked about the history of the type press' and how they relate to how knowledge is power. I really found the Pre-Gutenburg Era to be fascinating.
I really like how Miller explained the history of the printing press because it gave you a better view of how it evolved and how it has become what it is today.
Tuesday, September 15, 2015
Comment on Mass Communication Blog Entry by Emma Pagni
http://freshoffthepresswithemma.blogspot.com/2015/09/masscommunication-i-thought-that-this.html?showComment=1442354111951#c8936456473089622253
Above is the link to my comment on a reply to our mass communication discussion.
Above is the link to my comment on a reply to our mass communication discussion.
Magazines
Today we had a discussion about magazines. I found the concept incredibly intriguing. I had no idea that magazines were so old. I knew that newspapers dated all the way back to the 18th century and even further but I didn't know that this was true of magazines. To me, a magazine is bigger than a newspaper but smaller than your average novel with glossy pages and a glossy cover, which made me believe that they were not very old.
The discussion was very fascinating because the way Miller explained what was inside of the magazine reminded me of what is inside of the literary magazine, One Blue Wall. Miller explained that in old magazines there was serialized fiction, children and adults fiction, personality profiles, and investigative articles. In later years when we could print photos, photo journalism was introduced. All of these things are included in One Blue Wall. I think that magazines today should revert to the original content of magazines. Whenever I see a magazine I can't help but think "I would never read that, it's full of gossip and garbage," which would not be true if we reverted to the original content of magazines. I think that it would be really cool if we continued to do serialized fiction in magazines today.
Another part of the discussion I really found interesting was when we talked about how it gave people a reason to be literate. I completely agreed with this. It's interesting how many conversations you have a day about things you read about or saw on the news or read in a book. This would definitely give people a reason to read so that they can be part of the conversation and not be left out. I know that what really got me to start reading was hearing people talk about books in and out of school and give amazing reviews and have long and drawn out conversations about an article or book.
The discussion was very fascinating because the way Miller explained what was inside of the magazine reminded me of what is inside of the literary magazine, One Blue Wall. Miller explained that in old magazines there was serialized fiction, children and adults fiction, personality profiles, and investigative articles. In later years when we could print photos, photo journalism was introduced. All of these things are included in One Blue Wall. I think that magazines today should revert to the original content of magazines. Whenever I see a magazine I can't help but think "I would never read that, it's full of gossip and garbage," which would not be true if we reverted to the original content of magazines. I think that it would be really cool if we continued to do serialized fiction in magazines today.
Another part of the discussion I really found interesting was when we talked about how it gave people a reason to be literate. I completely agreed with this. It's interesting how many conversations you have a day about things you read about or saw on the news or read in a book. This would definitely give people a reason to read so that they can be part of the conversation and not be left out. I know that what really got me to start reading was hearing people talk about books in and out of school and give amazing reviews and have long and drawn out conversations about an article or book.
Demassification
Since the actual concept of demassification is a response, it allows people to understand more about it because they can relate and understand it.
To me, demassification makes a lot of sense. Put yourself in a situation where demassification would occur.
You are a CEO of a major magazine publication. You are having a meeting with your sales officer who tells you that your overall sales are down since the publication of the new food magazine. Your magazine has a food section but it is not the whole magazine. Ten years ago when you started the publication, you wanted to be able to reach everyone with your magazine but now people have interests, and they only want to read about their interest. After research of other magazine publications and retrieving data about your own, you decide to target only a few audiences with your publication. You cut your food section, self quizzes, and sports section and leave the fashion and celebrity sections so you can target a young adult audience.
This is demassification, it was a response to your lower sales. To keep yourself from going underwater, you changed audiences and targeted young adults. A lot of demassification has to do with advertising, if you see advertising in something changing, then demassification is happening with that company.
To me, demassification makes a lot of sense. Put yourself in a situation where demassification would occur.
You are a CEO of a major magazine publication. You are having a meeting with your sales officer who tells you that your overall sales are down since the publication of the new food magazine. Your magazine has a food section but it is not the whole magazine. Ten years ago when you started the publication, you wanted to be able to reach everyone with your magazine but now people have interests, and they only want to read about their interest. After research of other magazine publications and retrieving data about your own, you decide to target only a few audiences with your publication. You cut your food section, self quizzes, and sports section and leave the fashion and celebrity sections so you can target a young adult audience.
This is demassification, it was a response to your lower sales. To keep yourself from going underwater, you changed audiences and targeted young adults. A lot of demassification has to do with advertising, if you see advertising in something changing, then demassification is happening with that company.
Monday, September 14, 2015
Comment on Elitist/Populist Blog Entry by Nicole White
http://www.meme-queen-trash-horder.blogspot.com/2015/09/mr-millers-views-on-elitist-and.html
Above is the link to my comment on a reply to our types of media discussion.
Above is the link to my comment on a reply to our types of media discussion.
Wednesday, September 9, 2015
Conglomeration
I think that the concept of conglomeration is one of the widest concepts of mass communication. I find the topic very interesting and fun to learn about. Following the lecture, I was really thinking about how we can see conglomeration in our everyday lives.
I remember from class we talked about how Disney owns other networking channels like ABC and NBC. After class, I tuned in to these channels and watched for a bit to see if I could pick up on any signs that conglomeration was present. I knew that conglomeration was in affect for the channels like ABC when a commercial for the show Once Upon A Time came on. I watched the show in the first few seasons and then lost interest after a while. From what I remember, Once Upon A Time is a show based on fairytale characters and creatures that are virtually "stuck" in Storybrook, Oregon. The fairytale characters were the classic characters like Rumpelstiltskin, Little Red Riding Hood, and The Elves and the Shoemaker. But as it has progressed, more and more Disney characters have made an appearance on the show. In the commercial, Disney characters like Merida from Brave and Elsa and Ana from Frozen are being introduced in the upcoming season. Using my knowledge from the conglomeration lecture, I figured out that this was a sign of the type of conglomeration we talked about. Disney is the bigger company that bought out so many other smaller businesses, like ABC and NBC. The introduction of the characters in the show Once Upon A Time, which is produced by ABC, which is owned by Disney is a type of self promotion and advertising.
I thought that the fact that I could make these type of relations was really interesting and the way that I remember information. I hope that we continue to have lectures where I can relate the information to outside sources.
I remember from class we talked about how Disney owns other networking channels like ABC and NBC. After class, I tuned in to these channels and watched for a bit to see if I could pick up on any signs that conglomeration was present. I knew that conglomeration was in affect for the channels like ABC when a commercial for the show Once Upon A Time came on. I watched the show in the first few seasons and then lost interest after a while. From what I remember, Once Upon A Time is a show based on fairytale characters and creatures that are virtually "stuck" in Storybrook, Oregon. The fairytale characters were the classic characters like Rumpelstiltskin, Little Red Riding Hood, and The Elves and the Shoemaker. But as it has progressed, more and more Disney characters have made an appearance on the show. In the commercial, Disney characters like Merida from Brave and Elsa and Ana from Frozen are being introduced in the upcoming season. Using my knowledge from the conglomeration lecture, I figured out that this was a sign of the type of conglomeration we talked about. Disney is the bigger company that bought out so many other smaller businesses, like ABC and NBC. The introduction of the characters in the show Once Upon A Time, which is produced by ABC, which is owned by Disney is a type of self promotion and advertising.
I thought that the fact that I could make these type of relations was really interesting and the way that I remember information. I hope that we continue to have lectures where I can relate the information to outside sources.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)