Do I think that the U.S. culture is overly materialistic? Yes. After learning about the incident at that Wal-Mart in New York I wasn’t surprised at all. Every black Friday the news glamorizes the frenzy that consumers have as they trample one another to get the big new item for the season. Whether that item is a new toy for their child or a big fancy plasma TV. the lust for materialism is the same. I always wondered how we as a culture have gotten to this point but I quickly realized that mankind hasn’t gotten worse, it simply hasn’t evolved. Lust for materialism and greed for power has existed for thousands of years but now it has crept into the holidays. The holidays are supposed to be a time of reflection and appreciation for the gifts that we already have, but is has turned into a time of ones upmanship.
As a kid growing up my parents didn’t have much money. My extended family would give me some small gifts and I would then get one “big” gift from my parents. I never complained because the kids I hung around as a kid also were not well off. I suppose I was ignorant to the massive amount of toys that other kids got until my family moved to the suburbs when I was nine years old. I had a friend who actually got gifts on every holiday. He got video games on Christmas, his birthday, Easter and yes even Valentine’s day. When he asked me what I got for Valentine ’s Day one year I pulled out some candy my mom gave me and showed it to him. The suburbs did open my eyes to just how much I was supposedly missing out on and I feel bad now for the times I complained to my parents about not having what my friends had. My sister and I had clothes from K-Mart and shoes from Payless. A pair of Levis jeans was a luxury item. I wasn’t poor my any stretch of the imagination, I just wasn’t rich and it was obvious.
I’m not sure if advertisers are completely guiltless in the way we as a society have become more materialistic. Parents are responsible for what their children watch and if parents don’t let their kids watch certain shows they wouldn’t want to buy certain toys. That being said it is difficult to not let advertising influence your children. McDonalds is an example of marketing towards kids. Ronald McDonald and all the other characters are not there to get adults to buy hamburgers. They are there to promote fun for kids. Happy Meals and the toys inside of them are specifically used to grab a kid’s money while they are still young and impressionable. By the time these kids hit middle school they’re like zombies for fast food. You see the golden arches and you’re reminded of all the fun you had as a kid getting a happy meal and a toy and like a moth to flame you supersize your gut and mini size your wallet. It happens at a subconscious level at times. I’m sure if you watch an episode of any Disney show, kids must be bombarded by toy commercials and fast food commercials. Advertisers know that the way to get parents to buy their kids toys is to advertise to kids and let them nag their way to a new playstation 3.
The best way to sell a product is to sell a lifestlye. If you want girls to like you, buy a special cologne. If you want your coworkers to be jealous of you, buy a Lexus. If you want your wife to love you, you better buy her the biggest diamond ring she’s ever seen. Marketers know that we as people are insecure pawns who are always looking to be led somewhere. People roam the earth aimlessly looking for a purpose or someone to follow. Advertisers know this so they get celebrities to endorse their products. Be like Mike and drink Gatorade. Advertisers understand human nature and realize that people will do or buy anything that distracts them from the grind known as reality. Materialism distracts people from reality because material things evoke emotion. You don’t buy a fancy car because consumer reports said it tested best in a crash, you buy a fancy car because of how it makes you FEEL. When you’re behind the wheel of a Lexus you FEEL rich, you FEEL envied you FEEL powerful. People do things for emotional highs. Even giving money to charity ironically causes people to feel good. People don’t do things just to do them there is always a reason behind it.
I always felt the society as a whole would benefit from being less materialistic. I quickly realized that without materialistic people and greed the economy would be in shambles. Without people buying products, people who make those products would lose their jobs. Since those people don’t have jobs they won’t buy other products which would make others lose their jobs. It would be a vicious cycle. What’s best for the human spirit may not be what’s best for the material world. I’ll end with one of the wisest phrases that I was ever told, “everything in moderation.”
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
AM or FM radio
I don’t listen to radio as much as I used to but the radio that I do listen
to tends to be more talk radio than anything else. Back in Chicago I would listen
to a sports station called 670 the score. It was a clear channel radio station and
I used to listen to it for hours on end. Whenever I’d have any free time or if I
was driving to work I would listen to that particular station.
FM radio used to interest me when there was music that I enjoyed on it. I think
radio has gotten so commercialized that content is not important. The songs they
play on the radio today are mostly songs for people with short attention spans. I
enjoy hip hop music but not what they play on the radio. There are some very
talented artists who have a tremendous vocabulary and rap with purpose about issues
and things going on around the world. Although they occasionally play these artists
on the radio, they never play their best songs. They play whatever is most catchy
and whatever is safest for audiences. Even though I do enjoy the occasional “fun
song” where it’s just something that puts you in a good mood I feel the FM stations
today play songs that you might enjoy while at a club or working out. They play
songs made by artists with no talent whose only claim to fame is a decent beat and
an image created by the record label. I suppose the days of requiring talent to be
famous are long gone.
As stated earlier I really enjoyed listening to 670 the score in Chicago. I
think the reasons why are simple. I enjoy sports and the radio show hosts don’t
take themselves too seriously. There are plenty of radio stations who talk sports
but they’re too analytical. They spend hours talking about stats and facts. On the
other hand there are radio shows who try too hard to be funny and not talk enough
sports. This particular radio station has a perfect balance of both. One
particular show “Boers and Bernstein” are a couple of wise cracking radio hosts who
combine intelligent debate with goofy sometimes childish antics. It’s difficult to
explain. They don’t throw softball questions to guests but they also don’t try to
trick their guests for the sake of ratings.
One particular segment that may seem sophomoric but is a lot of fun to listen to is called “who ya crappin.” If someone has lied or exaggerated the truth you may call in the radio show and express your anger towards that person. You can call about writers, athletes, politicians even the radio hosts are not safe. It’s not a yelling fest however you actually have to put some thought into it. There are some really witty people who call in the radio show. If you go to 670thescore.com under podcasts, click on Boers and Bernstein and then click on the who ya crappin’ link. It doesn’t make sense unless you listen to it. It has good and bad weeks but it’s mostly clever in an immature way. I highly recommend listening to an entire segment before any judgments are made. It’s an acquired taste.
Today I tend to either download the music I do enjoy or listen to talk radio.
In Orlando I started listening to 104.1 when the election was going on. I’m not a
big fan of FM radio but I think that there’s not much they can do to compete with
satellite radio and the popularity of iTunes. When I first heard about high
definition radio I thought it was a joke. I really don’t think people will pay
extra for edited, watered down music in high definition. The reason people don’t
listen to the radio in the first place is because of the poor selection of decent
music so why would you want to listen to poor music in high definition? I do listen
to FM radio when I’m in my car at times but a lot less than I used to.
to tends to be more talk radio than anything else. Back in Chicago I would listen
to a sports station called 670 the score. It was a clear channel radio station and
I used to listen to it for hours on end. Whenever I’d have any free time or if I
was driving to work I would listen to that particular station.
FM radio used to interest me when there was music that I enjoyed on it. I think
radio has gotten so commercialized that content is not important. The songs they
play on the radio today are mostly songs for people with short attention spans. I
enjoy hip hop music but not what they play on the radio. There are some very
talented artists who have a tremendous vocabulary and rap with purpose about issues
and things going on around the world. Although they occasionally play these artists
on the radio, they never play their best songs. They play whatever is most catchy
and whatever is safest for audiences. Even though I do enjoy the occasional “fun
song” where it’s just something that puts you in a good mood I feel the FM stations
today play songs that you might enjoy while at a club or working out. They play
songs made by artists with no talent whose only claim to fame is a decent beat and
an image created by the record label. I suppose the days of requiring talent to be
famous are long gone.
As stated earlier I really enjoyed listening to 670 the score in Chicago. I
think the reasons why are simple. I enjoy sports and the radio show hosts don’t
take themselves too seriously. There are plenty of radio stations who talk sports
but they’re too analytical. They spend hours talking about stats and facts. On the
other hand there are radio shows who try too hard to be funny and not talk enough
sports. This particular radio station has a perfect balance of both. One
particular show “Boers and Bernstein” are a couple of wise cracking radio hosts who
combine intelligent debate with goofy sometimes childish antics. It’s difficult to
explain. They don’t throw softball questions to guests but they also don’t try to
trick their guests for the sake of ratings.
One particular segment that may seem sophomoric but is a lot of fun to listen to is called “who ya crappin.” If someone has lied or exaggerated the truth you may call in the radio show and express your anger towards that person. You can call about writers, athletes, politicians even the radio hosts are not safe. It’s not a yelling fest however you actually have to put some thought into it. There are some really witty people who call in the radio show. If you go to 670thescore.com under podcasts, click on Boers and Bernstein and then click on the who ya crappin’ link. It doesn’t make sense unless you listen to it. It has good and bad weeks but it’s mostly clever in an immature way. I highly recommend listening to an entire segment before any judgments are made. It’s an acquired taste.
Today I tend to either download the music I do enjoy or listen to talk radio.
In Orlando I started listening to 104.1 when the election was going on. I’m not a
big fan of FM radio but I think that there’s not much they can do to compete with
satellite radio and the popularity of iTunes. When I first heard about high
definition radio I thought it was a joke. I really don’t think people will pay
extra for edited, watered down music in high definition. The reason people don’t
listen to the radio in the first place is because of the poor selection of decent
music so why would you want to listen to poor music in high definition? I do listen
to FM radio when I’m in my car at times but a lot less than I used to.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Essay Number 2
1. Have you enjoyed reading the Wall Street Journal? Explain why you have enjoyed it, or why not.
Answer: I haven’t enjoyed reading the Wall Street Journal as much as I could have. I think the reason why is because anytime something is mandatory reading it automatically takes away a sense of enjoyment. If I had decided to read the paper on my own I may have enjoyed it more because it was my choice. I also think it’s less enjoyable because I know that we have to get tested on it. Reading for fun and reading in order to remember facts are two different things. Even if the topics interest me in the back of my head all I can think about is what I need to memorize.
2. How has reading the newspaper helped you learn about Mass Communications media? Explain, and give some examples of what you’ve learned.
Answer: I have learned about mass communications by reading the paper. There were several times when I would be reading about certain movies or books that opened my eyes to things that I was ignorant about. One example was the recent article about T.V. Guide being bought out for $1. I had no idea something like this was possible in the media market. To be able to purchase a company at that price no matter how unsuccessful, is remarkable. Another example was learning about how the media covers every possible topic. Reading an article about Yahoo in one section and then about a boy and an Obama sign in his front yard in another section showed me that there is no limit to what the media can cover. I was fascinated about how in depth these writers are, to be able to write about anything and make it sound interesting. That’s a real gift that not everyone has.
3. Compared to traditional textbook-based study and learning methods, is reading the newspaper a better or worse educational experience? Expand your answers with details and examples.
Answer:
I think that reading the newspaper is better for a real life education. Reading a traditional textbook does nothing to prepare for a career other than knowing certain facts that may help you in the long run. Memorizing dates and people I think is a way to pay homage to those that helped create what journalism is today but it does little to challenge students to create something new. I think having tests from a book would be easier because all you would have to do is cram for a few days, take a couple of tests and be done with it. The problem is the very next day all those facts would escape me and I would be left with nothing. Reading the newspaper although time consuming not only helped me to understand the media better but it also forced me to pay attention to small details in the articles. I believe that textbook-based learning methods fit better with typical grading standards but does very little to challenge the students. The grading system is built around teaching to the tests. Students only try to remember facts that they know will be on the test but don’t retain much information. Other forms of teaching may teach students in a better way but it is difficult to find a way to evaluate them.
4. Has the reading assignment changed your behavior, i.e., your daily schedule, your study habits, your desire for news and information?
Answer:
The reading assignment has changed my behavior because I had to budget my time differently. Most other classes I’d be able to put off studying until a few days before an exam but if I know that I have to take a quiz every time I go to class, my habits had to change. For the first few weeks I just collected the newspapers and read them all on Sunday night and Tuesday night but I quickly realized that it took too much time for one sitting. I started skimming the paper in the morning and then I would revisit the articles before class. I’m not a big morning person but reading the Wall Street Journal made me get up earlier. I think being required to read the paper on a daily basis helped my mind get a little sharper.
5. Are the weekly quizzes an effective way to measure what you’ve learned by reading the Wall Street Journal? If yes, why? If no, why? Add suggestions for other ways to measure learning.
Answer:
I think the quizzes are a good way to check up on students to see if we’re reading the paper. I think that it’s difficult to judge if it’s an effective measure on what we learned. The reason I say this is because the Wall Street Journal is filled with dates, numbers, and names. A person quite possible could read all the required articles and still forget a name or two. I do think that having the bonus questions on the quiz help to make up for it. If a topic is interesting to me I’m more likely to remember that article so it’s good to be able to have a larger variety of questions to choose from. Overall the quizzes keep us on our toes and allows us to read about real world situations instead of learning about the history of media itself. I think it makes class more enjoyable because there is a new topic of discussion everyday.
6. How likely are you to renew your subscription to The Wall Street Journal after this semester? Give an expansive answer, with reasons.
Answer:
I will not be getting a subscription to The Wall Street Journal after the semester is over. Although being required to read The Wall Journal has opened my eyes to some interesting events that are going on around the world, I didn’t enjoy reading the business portion of it. To be frank numbers bore me. I think the reason why some may find The Wall Street Journal boring is because , in my opinion, it lacks emotional language. Perhaps it’s only in the business section where this happens but it didn’t grab my attention. Every time the name of a company or a number followed by a percent sign showed up, my mind stopped caring. It’s not the fault of the paper, I think I’m just looking to find a poem hidden in a resume. My personality is more catered towards symbolism and opinion more than numbers and dates. I may subscribe to a Time magazine or something along those lines but not The Wall Street Journal.
Answer: I haven’t enjoyed reading the Wall Street Journal as much as I could have. I think the reason why is because anytime something is mandatory reading it automatically takes away a sense of enjoyment. If I had decided to read the paper on my own I may have enjoyed it more because it was my choice. I also think it’s less enjoyable because I know that we have to get tested on it. Reading for fun and reading in order to remember facts are two different things. Even if the topics interest me in the back of my head all I can think about is what I need to memorize.
2. How has reading the newspaper helped you learn about Mass Communications media? Explain, and give some examples of what you’ve learned.
Answer: I have learned about mass communications by reading the paper. There were several times when I would be reading about certain movies or books that opened my eyes to things that I was ignorant about. One example was the recent article about T.V. Guide being bought out for $1. I had no idea something like this was possible in the media market. To be able to purchase a company at that price no matter how unsuccessful, is remarkable. Another example was learning about how the media covers every possible topic. Reading an article about Yahoo in one section and then about a boy and an Obama sign in his front yard in another section showed me that there is no limit to what the media can cover. I was fascinated about how in depth these writers are, to be able to write about anything and make it sound interesting. That’s a real gift that not everyone has.
3. Compared to traditional textbook-based study and learning methods, is reading the newspaper a better or worse educational experience? Expand your answers with details and examples.
Answer:
I think that reading the newspaper is better for a real life education. Reading a traditional textbook does nothing to prepare for a career other than knowing certain facts that may help you in the long run. Memorizing dates and people I think is a way to pay homage to those that helped create what journalism is today but it does little to challenge students to create something new. I think having tests from a book would be easier because all you would have to do is cram for a few days, take a couple of tests and be done with it. The problem is the very next day all those facts would escape me and I would be left with nothing. Reading the newspaper although time consuming not only helped me to understand the media better but it also forced me to pay attention to small details in the articles. I believe that textbook-based learning methods fit better with typical grading standards but does very little to challenge the students. The grading system is built around teaching to the tests. Students only try to remember facts that they know will be on the test but don’t retain much information. Other forms of teaching may teach students in a better way but it is difficult to find a way to evaluate them.
4. Has the reading assignment changed your behavior, i.e., your daily schedule, your study habits, your desire for news and information?
Answer:
The reading assignment has changed my behavior because I had to budget my time differently. Most other classes I’d be able to put off studying until a few days before an exam but if I know that I have to take a quiz every time I go to class, my habits had to change. For the first few weeks I just collected the newspapers and read them all on Sunday night and Tuesday night but I quickly realized that it took too much time for one sitting. I started skimming the paper in the morning and then I would revisit the articles before class. I’m not a big morning person but reading the Wall Street Journal made me get up earlier. I think being required to read the paper on a daily basis helped my mind get a little sharper.
5. Are the weekly quizzes an effective way to measure what you’ve learned by reading the Wall Street Journal? If yes, why? If no, why? Add suggestions for other ways to measure learning.
Answer:
I think the quizzes are a good way to check up on students to see if we’re reading the paper. I think that it’s difficult to judge if it’s an effective measure on what we learned. The reason I say this is because the Wall Street Journal is filled with dates, numbers, and names. A person quite possible could read all the required articles and still forget a name or two. I do think that having the bonus questions on the quiz help to make up for it. If a topic is interesting to me I’m more likely to remember that article so it’s good to be able to have a larger variety of questions to choose from. Overall the quizzes keep us on our toes and allows us to read about real world situations instead of learning about the history of media itself. I think it makes class more enjoyable because there is a new topic of discussion everyday.
6. How likely are you to renew your subscription to The Wall Street Journal after this semester? Give an expansive answer, with reasons.
Answer:
I will not be getting a subscription to The Wall Street Journal after the semester is over. Although being required to read The Wall Journal has opened my eyes to some interesting events that are going on around the world, I didn’t enjoy reading the business portion of it. To be frank numbers bore me. I think the reason why some may find The Wall Street Journal boring is because , in my opinion, it lacks emotional language. Perhaps it’s only in the business section where this happens but it didn’t grab my attention. Every time the name of a company or a number followed by a percent sign showed up, my mind stopped caring. It’s not the fault of the paper, I think I’m just looking to find a poem hidden in a resume. My personality is more catered towards symbolism and opinion more than numbers and dates. I may subscribe to a Time magazine or something along those lines but not The Wall Street Journal.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Reading Habits
My reading habits have been a little bit better these past few months. As a child I really did enjoy reading a lot of books about dinosaurs and space. For some reason kids tend to gravitate towards things like that and I was no different. In school there were a lot of books that I was required to read. I don’t think I enjoyed them as much as I could have had they not been mandatory.
Nowadays I tend to read more spiritual and psychological type of books. Human nature has always fascinated me. Why do people do what they do?
The books I read try to bring science and spirituality together. I believe science can buttress certain spiritual teachings without losing it’s grip on reality. Like Einstein said "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Deepak Chopra is an interesting author I enjoy reading. He’s kind of this new agey type author but he brings science into his readings to solidify his arguments. Those who are are more about "what" than "why" may not enjoy his books but it's good to keep an open mind. I had no idea how popular he was until I saw him in a recent microsoft commercial.
Since I'm into psychology and spirituality there is an interesting book about reincarnation and past lives. Many Lives, Many Masters by Dr. Brian Weiss is a fascinating read. When I mention things like that people scoff or laugh and think it's some crazy new age bullshit but keeping an open mind is vital in bettering yourself. Dr Weiss is a psychotherapist who graduated from Columbia University and Yale Medical School so he's no sloutch. Brian was a skeptic but he used hypnotherapy in his sessions with his patients to help get over past trauma. He would use regression therapy to help them remember past events and tried to piece together what was going on in the mind of his patients. In regression therapy he would ask the patient to go back to the time when the problem started allowing the subconscious to come to surface. He was surprised one day when a women described events that appeared to be from an earlier time period. Being a skeptic Dr Weiss simply thought it was a vivid imagination until hundreds of other patients kept describing similiar instances of being in past lives. There is a case where a man had painful migraines his entire life and went into a regression therapy session. He apparently was a World War 2 soldier who was shot in the head and killed in a past life. Imagination? Maybe. The interesting thing is after a few sessions he no longer had these painful migraines. Migraines that have been with him his entire life vanished. There are therapeutic benefits to this therapy even you don't believe in it. There are hundreds of similar cases like these but it's interesting for me to read about things that aren't in the main stream. Just because CNN doesn't cover it doesn't mean it's not out there and just becaue you don't believe something is true doesn't mean it's not.
Some other basic books are Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill and How To Think Like
Leonardo Da Vinci by Michael Gelb. Some of the book talks about Da Vinci as a person but a majority of the book discusses exercises that can be used to bring out your own “inner genius.” One example is to attempt to write with both hands at once or using a mirror and write everything backwards. Although at times I found the book boring there were lots of creative exercises that are meant to strengthen your critical thinking skills.
In general I’m proud of the fact that I enjoy reading at times but I still am not like others who enjoy reading for hours on end. After about an hour of reading my mind gets bored and needs to do something else. Right now I'm reading DMT The Spirit Molecule by Rick Strassman, M.D. It's about this drug that can induce near death experiences and tries to explain the biology behind spiritual experiences. If you've never read anything else about the mind or spirituality, don't bother reading this book. It'll scare the shit out of you.
Nowadays I tend to read more spiritual and psychological type of books. Human nature has always fascinated me. Why do people do what they do?
The books I read try to bring science and spirituality together. I believe science can buttress certain spiritual teachings without losing it’s grip on reality. Like Einstein said "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Deepak Chopra is an interesting author I enjoy reading. He’s kind of this new agey type author but he brings science into his readings to solidify his arguments. Those who are are more about "what" than "why" may not enjoy his books but it's good to keep an open mind. I had no idea how popular he was until I saw him in a recent microsoft commercial.
Since I'm into psychology and spirituality there is an interesting book about reincarnation and past lives. Many Lives, Many Masters by Dr. Brian Weiss is a fascinating read. When I mention things like that people scoff or laugh and think it's some crazy new age bullshit but keeping an open mind is vital in bettering yourself. Dr Weiss is a psychotherapist who graduated from Columbia University and Yale Medical School so he's no sloutch. Brian was a skeptic but he used hypnotherapy in his sessions with his patients to help get over past trauma. He would use regression therapy to help them remember past events and tried to piece together what was going on in the mind of his patients. In regression therapy he would ask the patient to go back to the time when the problem started allowing the subconscious to come to surface. He was surprised one day when a women described events that appeared to be from an earlier time period. Being a skeptic Dr Weiss simply thought it was a vivid imagination until hundreds of other patients kept describing similiar instances of being in past lives. There is a case where a man had painful migraines his entire life and went into a regression therapy session. He apparently was a World War 2 soldier who was shot in the head and killed in a past life. Imagination? Maybe. The interesting thing is after a few sessions he no longer had these painful migraines. Migraines that have been with him his entire life vanished. There are therapeutic benefits to this therapy even you don't believe in it. There are hundreds of similar cases like these but it's interesting for me to read about things that aren't in the main stream. Just because CNN doesn't cover it doesn't mean it's not out there and just becaue you don't believe something is true doesn't mean it's not.
Some other basic books are Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill and How To Think Like
Leonardo Da Vinci by Michael Gelb. Some of the book talks about Da Vinci as a person but a majority of the book discusses exercises that can be used to bring out your own “inner genius.” One example is to attempt to write with both hands at once or using a mirror and write everything backwards. Although at times I found the book boring there were lots of creative exercises that are meant to strengthen your critical thinking skills.
In general I’m proud of the fact that I enjoy reading at times but I still am not like others who enjoy reading for hours on end. After about an hour of reading my mind gets bored and needs to do something else. Right now I'm reading DMT The Spirit Molecule by Rick Strassman, M.D. It's about this drug that can induce near death experiences and tries to explain the biology behind spiritual experiences. If you've never read anything else about the mind or spirituality, don't bother reading this book. It'll scare the shit out of you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)