Peter Pan’s Paradigm

For our last and final blog post, we have been assigned the task of analyzing a type of person presented in a particular “text.” I chose to analyze the movie “Hook”, a film directed by Steven Speilberg, one of my all-time favorite movies. Since the movie’s debut in December of 1991, I’ve watched it numerous times. In the film, Robin Williams plays a grown-up Peter Pan who must return to Neverland to save his children. In the process he reunites with the Lost Boys, a group of misfit kids who live in Neverland, and battles his long-time enemy, Captain Hook. A twist in the movie is that Peter is a successful lawyer and has no recollection of his past as Peter Pan or even his battles with Captain Hook as a child. The juxtaposition of Captain Hook to the children shows that grown-ups no longer appreciate the simple things in life, whereas children do. In my opinion, “Hook” sends a helpful message to adults by showing them that they can enrich their lives not living within traditional, rigid constraints of being an adult.

I chose to qualify my analysis in the way Bonnie Dow (1996) qualifies her own, in the book “Prime-Time Feminism: Television, Media Culture, and the Women’s Movement Since 1970”, by not pushing my viewpoints on to others, I merely hope for others to consider my argument when coming up with their own opinion. I encourage people to interpret this “text” in any way they please.

            The film opens with the work-obsessed Peter Banning (Robin Williams) who struggles to balance his career and his family. He fails to do so and becomes a father who is missing out on his children’s lives. At one point Peter says to his son Jack, “What the hell’s the matter with you? When are you going to stop acting like a child?” Jack simply replies, “I am a child.” Then Peter snaps, “Grow up.” In the beginning of the movie, it almost seems bad to be a child, but after they are taken to Neverland being a kid is marvelous. This is not necessarily a critique of all fathers in the world; however it can help people recognize the joy children get out of the simple things in life, such as when the Lost Boys showed how much fun dinner could be with a food fight.

The children in Neverland are free from parents; they are able to do what ever they want. Adults are portrayed as the enemy, the head Lost Boy once says, “All grown-ups are pirates!” Because adults are seen as the enemy, Peter finds himself held back by his own adult paradigm. He is trapped by what he sees as appropriate adult behavior.  With help from the Lost Boys, Peter is once again able to find his inner child, which then allows him to take his place as leader of the Lost Boys. He can then save his children from the evil Captain Hook. 

It was only when he thought and “acted like a child” that he was finally able to defeat Captain Hook. With his new state of mind Peter was able to return to his life in the real world with a better understanding of the important things in life. Peter clearly learned a lesson and aspires to apply his new found inner child in his everyday life. Peter proves his altered mindset when Wendy says, “So… your adventures are over.” and Peter replies, “Oh, no. To live… to live would be an awfully big adventure.” 

 

References

Dow, B. (1996). Prime-time feminism: Television, media culture, and the women’s movement since 1970. Philadelphia: University Press.

Hart, J.V. (Executive Producer), & Speilberg, S. (Director). (1991). Hook [Motion Picture]. United States: TriStar

Copyright Laws: Good or Bad?

As of right now the copyright law is an exclusive legal right given to the creator of an original work to control its distribution for a lifetime plus seventy years then the work is released to the public. This seems like a pretty reasonable law to abide, but who can up with the seventy years after a lifetime? Where does one come up with such a random number? Is seventy years really enough time?  Say if a creator has his work copyrighted and then when his lifetime ends he passes the company down to his heir. What is his heir expected to do when the seventy years are up? It seems that this awkward time limit brings up more questions than answers. 

Take Walt Disney for example, everyone has heard of the huge company that he created Disney.  Whether they know it form the kids’ movies or the amusement parks, everyone knows that brand.  Founder, or should I say creator, of this well know company has been dead for over forty years now.  Does that mean that in thirty years we are going to see the end of the Disney enterprise? I hope not.  It would be a shame to see such a powerful and influential enterprises lost due to lack of protection.

Although I feel the time limitations are not up to my expectations but the copyright law really does protect people’s creations.  Disney would not be the company it is today if people were allowed to take his ideas as their own.  Protective laws like these have created a safe environment for artists to publish their work. With out these laws we would not have the various aspects of art currently available for us.

On the opposing side of this argument I can also see how seventy years could be too long.  Is it really fair that Disney can capitalize on this market without any competition? It seems that since Disney does not have to compete with any competing companies they are free to do as they please, which is not always a good thing.

Even though I have used Disney as an example movies are not the only things covered under the copyright laws.  As I mentioned earlier this law gives right to creators, meaning that no matter what people create it will be protected. Most of the time when the word creator is used we automatically assume creators are artists when in fact all sorts of creations are protected, from abstract inventions to forms of written work.

The copyright law may have some flaws but overall it has a positive influence on the creative world and it would not be the same without it.  Maybe in the future we can alter the copyright guidelines but for now it is serving its purpose and giving people to express themselves in a protected environment.

 

Sensationalized or Not?

This week I was asked to read an article from an online mainstream newspaper, so I chose The San Francisco Chronicle. Within the health section I found an article titled “Study: Wider cholesterol drug use may save lives,” which spoke about a recent study that found a new way of preventing heart diseases. This study found that by using cholesterol-lowering statin drugs, like Crestor, Lipitor, Zocor and other generic forms, many different types of heart disease can be prevented. Prevention of theses particular diseases is an excellent discovery, but it seems the press managed to make this far more sensationalized than it should have been. I agree with the fact that this is a positive discovery, but I am not entirely sure that this is as amazing as the reporter leads us to believe. It seems as if this advertisement was merely created to attract an audience. The title alone calls for attention, by combining “drugs” and “saves lives” in the same sentence people are sure to be interested.

            One thing managed to catch my eye while reading, I found that the study was only tested on individuals who had low cholesterol and had no significant risk of heart disease. Wouldn’t it seem obvious that these people would have decreased chances at getting heart disease anyway, without this drug?  Furthermore, in this particular study research was only tested on men over the age of 50 and women over the age of 60. The reporter mentioned that people who fit those specifications only make up about four percent of our population. Of course we need to improve the health of as many people as we can, but it seems that discovering a new way to improve the health of only four percent does not have that big of an affect on population as a whole.  If this new research could be applied to more people it truly would be something to sensationalize.

            In the article the reporter quoted input from the likes of Dr. W. Douglas Weaver, a Detroit cardiologist and president of the American College of Cardiology, a reliable source as it seems, and he said, “This takes prevention to a whole new level, because it applies to patients who we now wouldn’t have any evidence to treat.” I again agree that this is a great discovery, but do people who do not show evidence of needing treatment really need to be treated? Wouldn’t a doctor’s time be better spent prescribing medicine to those already showing signs of heart disease?

            Another thing I found interesting was that this study was originally set to be five years long, yet it ended after only two.  The researchers mentioned that in those two years, they were able to obtain enough information to properly reach their conclusion. That led me to question whether or not the researchers accounted for the possibility of problems showing up after years treatment. Since their study wasn’t finished, they cannot successfully predict how this could affect people in the long run. It is questions like these that leave me skeptical of the researcher’s discoveries.

            Now don’t get me wrong I think this is a great breakthrough in the medical field, but does this really affect everyone?  People are instantly interested in reading this article, due to the eye-catching title, but are then let done when they discover they do not a part of the four percent described.  What are the other ninety-six percent supposed to do?

Works Cited

Marchione, Marilynn. “Study: Wider cholesterol drug use may save lives.” SF Gate. 9 Nov. 2008.The Sanfrancisco Chronicle.10 Nov. 2008

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/11/09/national/a062031S17.DTL

New Forms of Advertisement

It’s weird to thing that our lifestyles have become so materialistic.  Television was once a medium used to join the family after a long day, but instead it has become a breeding ground for advertisements.  It is strange to think that there was once a time when television shows were not interrupted by commercials but now our shows are shorter and our commercials are getting longer.  Advertisements can be found anywhere from songs we hear on the radio to signs we see on the side of the freeway.  Many different types of advertisement exist today but television is by far the best form of getting the consumers attention. 

Although television was not a staple product in people’s houses years ago today it is very rare to find a home without at least one television.  And of course in this day and age if you have ever seen a television you have heard of the MTV channel.  This was once a channel that showed all sorts of music videos and the whole video if you can imagine that.  But now MTV has become heavily saturated with advertisements of all shapes and sizes.  One in particular that I enjoy to see is the “Above the Influence” commercials where they show kids that it is better live above the influence of drugs.  By showing these advertisements MTV has honed in on a great market.  Parents who were ever weary of the drug and alcohol content in music that their kids listen too are now appreciative of the fact that MTV doesn’t support that.  Parents now feel that their children should see educational commercials like that and therefore let their children watch MTV.  All though it may come off as a genuine attempt to make the world a better place, MTV’s main goal is ultimately to get more people to watch and with this new marketing campaign they have done just that. 

It seems like more and more companies are doing these off the charts campaign adds.  They are advertising outside of their personal production yet they find a way to tie it into their products.  It seems like a sick and twisted way to think about it but in reality it works for both parties.  Parents feel good that their children are watching shows that enhance a drug free lifestyle and companies are happy because more and more people are watching.  So why is it that advertising has such a big effect on us? One silly commercial has been able to change the minds of so many parents.  I think that because we are so used to seeing advertisements that we have now found a way of making them entertaining, and therefore no longer think of them like commercials instead they have become short little clips of entertainment.  The question is where are commercials going to go from here?  What will they think of next?

 

Women Binded by Stereotypes

It is sad to think that we live in a society complete consumed by media.  We have become reliant on the information provided to us via internet, news, and radio to the point where it dictates our lives.  What have we gotten ourselves into?  It seems that everywhere we turn there are stereotypes of all shapes and sizes.  Most of these are found on television in our everyday shows and commercials.  It seems that in the past and still in the present women are forced to live within the heaviest stereotypes.  As the article “Media Portrayals of Girls and Women” mentioned, “We all know the stereotypes—the femme fatale, the super mom, the sex kitten, the nasty corporate climber.”  For years now women have been placed in these demeaning stereotypes.  Although many strides have been made towards equality it seems that women will forever be seen within these boundaries.The assignment for this week is to research mass media mediums and their negative effect on society.  So far I have found too many topics that fit this particular general topic but I know that I can personally relate to the difficulties of women being placed into unrealistic stereotypes.  In today’s world women are faced with certain expectations, not because who they are as a person but simply because they are a woman. Media is directly involved in the ways people are viewed because it as a whole is the main problem.  “Media production entails a complex process of negotiation, processing, and reconstruction. It not only offers us something to see, but also shapes the way in which we see by creating’ shared perceptual modes (Kiovula 1999).”  People are simply controlled by our interactions with media. 

As a strong and confident woman I am constantly faced with the decision to either conform to what is expected of me and please people as a stereotypical woman always fragile and unable to handle herself or I can embrace my strength and power as an individual woman and threaten the people who are scared of change.  This is a difficult existence that most women find themselves in.  It is difficult to show strength as a woman because it is not the expected norm that we are used to seeing in media.  Media has found a way to taint out personal feelings and personal drive.  Women in history have fought relentlessly to gain the respect and influence that we have today.  So why is it that we continue to hold ourselves back?  I say we stand up for ourselves and take charge.  Women can be powerful and beautiful and we need to stop relying on media to reinforce our opinions of ourselves.

                                                                

Works Cited

Koivula, Nathalie. “Sex Roles: A Journal of Research.” Gender Stereotyping in Televised Media Sport Coverage (1999).

“Media and Girls.” Media Awareness Network. 2008. 30 Oct. 2008 <http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/stereotyping/women_and_girls/women_girls.cfm>.

“Media Portrayals of Girls and Women.” Media Awareness Network. 2008. 30 Oct. 2008 <http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/stereotyping/women_and_girls/index.cfm>.

 

 

 

Opening Up a Whole New World of Media

This week I have been given the opportunity to read a whole new type of media.  I have always been a fan of the ever popular CNN.  For the sole reason that it was all that I really knew.  It was easy and convenient to access the media by turning on the TV and flipping to CNN, a reliable channel that always showed the news.  I am now finding that CNN is not the only source of media, in fact I am finding it is a very biased form of media that mainly focuses on nonsense topics that only pertain to the particular local group which the show broadcasts to.  I feel that our local medias have no particular audience in mind, it needs to have the ability to be read by anyone in any frame of mind.  People need to have the ability to decide if the believe something or not, all on their own. But certain forms of mass media have taken the choice away from people.  The present media gives news in such a conniving way that your end reaction is exactly as they planned it to be. 

For the past week I have been reading the New Internationalist via the internet. It was amazing to find so many stories about countries so far away.  It seems like mass media here tends to focus on things local, because after all it is entertaining and people can relate to it.  But what about the news that no one here’s about.  I found the New Internationalist was able to provide that to me.  In all the articles that I read I found no connections to the United States.  It was a relief for once it wasn’t all about us.  One article I found very entertaining was about how China had promised to change its ways due to the demands of the 2008 Olympics.  And of course the ways that I am referring to are the communism government and its strict press policies. Although China had promised freedom of the press to the visiting countries this was not the case.  One reported experienced first hand that the local police officers were trained to restrain the press. 

One of the main things that intrigued me about his article was the fact that something like this would have never aired on CNN.  This topic was just so different that any other I had heard.  I was nice to be able to feel a connection with the reporter and really know that he was capable of giving you a first hand glance at what really happened. Nowhere in these articles did I see reporters push for their personal views instead they just wanted to inform you about what they witness and what they had learned themselves.  Many different sources were used, but the best ones I felt were the opinions and views of everyday people.  Instead of listing so some professional that you can not relate to it was refreshing to hear what people like me from all over the world thought.

                                         

 

Three Days of Predictions

For the past three days I have monitored the recent activity in the presidential election, since after all that was my Journalism 201: Mass Media and Society topic of the week.  In previous years collecting articles would have been difficult for three consecutive days but thanks to the internet I was able to log on to the internet each day and read endless amounts of articles on the web. 

After reading multiple articles I found that CNN represented both the democratic and the republican side relatively equally by having equal amounts of McCain supporting and Obama supporting articles.  In the many political articles I read I found they all fit the role of “press as soothsayer”.  Soothsayer isn’t exactly a word we hear everyday but in simple terms it is a method of the press attempting to tell the future, a method created by Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman.  In the eight articles I read, each one chose to mention the current polls and whether or not the final results of the election would reflect the prediction or contradict it.  It was obvious to see that the supports of Obama strongly agreed with the projected polls, since after all Obama is currently ahead, whereas supports of McCain contradicted the polls and mentioned ways how people will change their votes.

When it comes time for elections we as the population of the United States it is unfathomable for us to wait and see what the results are. Instead we do as much research as we can to predict what the outcome will be.  Due to this our media sees this as an opportunity to play the role of soothsayer.  By being able to predict the future we can properly prepare for our new elected president.  During these times journalists see it fit to predict the outcome with each and every article they write.  One says that since Obama is currently leading the polls that he will obviously win, whereas others say McCain will present the country with an upset.  In all actuality we have no idea how each and every person is going to vote.  Even though endless amounts of people have been surveyed to create the statistics each and every person is capable of changing their vote at a moments notice.

 

Even though these statistics are not set in concrete people still rely on them to make their voting decisions, and since they provide so much support for the voting Americans it is truly a media role that we can not live without, therefore making it the most important of the roles created by Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman in their book “The Press Effect”.

 

 

 

 

 

Allow Me to Introduce Myself

If you were to ask anyone they would say I am a talkative person, but when it comes to talking about myself my brain comes to a screeching halt.  I have no idea what people want to hear about me so hopefully this will suffice.  I am a simple California girl.  I was born and raised in the San Francisco Bay Area and my heart will always be there, but I now reside in Eugene, OR on the University of Oregon campus.  Many people have asked me why on earth I would want to leave the sunny weather in California for the wet and dreary rains in Oregon and to tell you the truth I absolutely love rain.  Weird I know, but it just smells so good and makes the trees so green.  Another reason I was so attracted to Oregon was that it wasn’t the normal choice for girls at my school.  For the most part the students at my high school strived to attend schools down in southern California, by going to southern California, they were getting far enough away from their parents while still staying within the state lines, oh and the beach wasn’t a bad thing either.  But that wasn’t the thing for me.  I have always been an individual, not necessarily with the way I dress but in the way I make decisions.  I don’t live in fear of what others think of me rather I live in fear of not living to my full potential.  While here at the University of Oregon I am taking a Journalism class focusing on Mass Media and Society which really brings me to the reason I have made this blog.  As a member of the class I am responsible for writing multiple blogs which will relate to the topics assigned by my teacher.  There will be many blogs to follow regarding those topics but on the off chance I really feel inspired I may just post blog of my own free will.  As of right now I like the idea of putting my ideas out into the world, since I know that once my opinion is out the world it is susceptible to criticism.  In all honesty no one enjoys criticism, but often it is the best way to gain perspective.  With out constructive criticism I would not be the person I am today, and for that matter none of us would be the individuals we are today.