Capture the Babe? I don't think so.

Women have fought to be respected by men. Many aspects of the media constantly put them down. Magazines make women feel like objects, music videos make women simply sexual beings, movies portray them as weaker than men, and songs are just plain offensive. So it doesn't surprise me that videogames follow the trend. Duke Nukem Forever is a videogame where players can play in "Capture the Babe" mode where the player has to abduct women and slap them. Yes, slap them. Women are portrayed as strippers and prostitutes, the main character in the game even gets implied oral from twins dressed up as school girls. How DISGUSTING. While this game has received an M rating, it is not enough of a barrier to keep children from purchasing it.
Games with violence have shown aggressive behavior amongst it's players. This game can possibly increase feelings of male superiority over women and increase violence against them. It is not uncommon that violent crimes against a person aren't over anger but done as a show of power. This is encouraging men to violently show their "power" over women. It is degrading. Where do we draw the line on what is acceptable? If a war game receives an M rating, should this receive something more severe? Where do we draw the line between what is implied sexual content and what is some form of pornography?
I am currently too annoyed to keep writing. This is ridiculous.

The World is Your Stage

Many years ago it took knowing someone to become famous. Now people can take that into their own account via social networking sites and other mediums that allow for us to distribute content to millions of people just by posting it online. While this allows for more talent to be discovered, this also allows for some pretty crazy stuff to be posted online. Sometimes these posts don't necessarily help the person's fame, in fact they give them a horrible reputation. This is something two California Girls learned recently.

A UCLA student posted an anti-Asian rant online not so long ago. This rant went viral and ended up in the student receiving death threats and many hateful comments. Being a political science student with any aspirations of someday becoming a politician (and relying on votes) she wasn't very smart in posting a racist rant. Although racism isn't completely gone from our country, it is frowned upon and when someone targets one group so hatefully it is seen as something horrible. Once something is posted online, it doesn't go away easily. This will follow her for the rest of her life. At her age she should've known better.

Now, the song that's been called the Worst Song Ever and the Worst Music Video Ever: Rebecca Black's "Friday." That song was so bad that it went viral. Unfortunately, it resulted in cyber-bullying towards the singer and many spoofs. Her talent as a singer was even questioned. What will people do to become famous? Was this a joke just to get publicity? I hope so. But I do think that the Social Media enabled people to bully a 13 year old girl. This type of fame wasn't the good kind. She's a joke now.

Social Media sites allow anyone to post and anyone can be heard. It's a freedom that we should not take lightly. Whatever is online is there for pretty much forever. It's a stage that never goes away, where your "performance" can be viewed over and over again. Watch out fellow cast-mates!

                                                               UCLA RANT

                                                            

                                                              FRIDAY SPOOF

Social Networking affecting Business

Have you ever heard of someone getting fired over something they posted on Facebook? Or an athlete getting a fee for a Twitter post? Well, it's not uncommon. In fact, I even have friends that have deactivated their Facebook accounts while they were in an interview process for a job or admission to a program. One friend even deactivated it while he was pledging a very strict fraternity at Dartmouth. Social networking sites provide people a way to communicate with others as well as post details about their daily lives. Some people post more frequently and more detail than they should. Where does the line between our personal lives and professional lives fade?
    Several days ago Chrysler ended it's relationship with New Media Strategies, a social media agency, over a tweet one of it's employees posted from Chrysler's Twitter account. Although it was meant to be posted to the employee's personal Twitter account, it was accidentally posted onto Chrysler's. This negative and explicit tweet made the company look bad. Although it was an accident, the employee was still careless and was fired for a post he made while he was at work. If he had just kept his frustration to himself, he might still have a job.
     We are all asked to be professional at work, if our personal lives are being tracked all over the internet when will we ever shed the overly professional exterior? Or will casual and relaxed become the new norm? How will Social Networking change professional relationships? I think the solution will be in leaving "something to the imagination" and knowing what's appropriate to post and what's not. After all, why do we NEED to let everyone know what we're doing, thinking, eating, feeling, buying, etc? Protect your own privacy and watch out what you post.

Disney Movie FLOPS?

Disney has been known to make some really good films for children, so it was a big surprise when their newly released "Mars Needs Moms" flopped. Could this mean that the reigning company for child entertainment was losing it's touch? Or were there just mistakes along the way? It is not uncommon in Hollywood for a film to be unsuccessful. We have grown so accustomed to films that we now expect great quality and innovation. We want the next great thing. So why is it that when an animated film tries something more new it flops?
   There are some theories as to why this film failed. One being the style of animation. Instead of using Pixar-style animation, making the cartoon characters very detailed but not extremely lifelike, they went with the Zemeckis technique. This requires the actors to be hooked up to a uniform with body sensors to pick up movement. While this animation may make a movie seem more realistic, is realism really what people want from a fictional cartoon?
     Another reason for the flop might be the plot itself. Children don't want to watch a movie about losing their moms. They don't want to think that their moms will be abducted by aliens. Children are easily convinced and can feel like this is real pretty easily. So, are film makers becoming careless? Should they consider their target audience more when choosing to produce a film? I think so. While the movie provides a new concept, it's not appealing to children. This was evident in the millions Disney lost on the release of this film. They need something new, what will be the next Toy Story, Monsters Inc, or Finding Nemo? Those were good, Show me what ya got Disney....not calling you out or anything.

They got to me....

Before reading, Watch this.

 

    Take a funny stereotype, an old song, and a comedic approach to a drink....and you have a good commercial. I am sad to say that I have fallen victim to this commercial. Yes, I actually bought a Sun Drop. Why? The commercial was funny. But at least the soda was good. This was clearly a commercial, but the focus wasn't explicitly on the product, it was more on the girl drinking it. And I think this actually made it more effective. It was approachable. I felt like I could relate. On a hot day, who doesn't want a cold drink? And who doesn't want to party during the summer. The commercial shows a fun atmosphere and that is what people want. Sometimes it's not even about showing the product that much, it's about being memorable. This was certainly memorable. I think I might even see some people dressed as her for Halloween. Some of my friends dressed like Flo from the Progressive commercials last summer. No matter what people may argue, this type of exposure will drive sales.

    Some popular ways for brands to get stuck in people's minds are by putting them in TV shows, movies, and even songs. Recently, B.O. B. got paid by Adidas just for saying "Kick it like Adidas" in his song 'Magic'. In 'Spiderman' he hits a can of Dr.Pepper when he discovers his webs. And on "The Nanny" they did a whole episode on Elizabeth Taylor's 'Black Pearls'. This is what I call sneaky advertising. The brand is put towards the people in an approachable way so that people are off-guard when exposed to it. Even magazines try to conceal the difference between what is an ad and what isn't. Seventeen magazine often has beauty tips and sometimes right next to them you'll see an ad for a skin care product, make-up, or a hair product in a similar format to the tips. Some ads even include tips. This makes people feel like if they want to look like the models in these editorial spreads, they need to use that brand. But the truth is that those models probably have used the product once in their lives. In the end, ads are made to be memorable and made to make people want to do something or buy something even if they don't need it. When money talks, the whole industry changes in order to get a piece of that. Where would we be if brands didn't exist and there was no competition? Impossible to think of, huh?

 

Going Digital

  I can't remember the last time I rented a movie from a store. Ever since I got Netflix, all I do is watch what comes in the mail or what's available on Instant. I even see more of my friends just stream movies and TV shows on Netflix. But do people really cancel their cable or other TV service and replace it with Netflix? What do they do when they have to wait to watch a new movie that Netflix doesn't have yet?      Comcast found these loopholes in Netflix's service. Comcast believes they can compete with Netflix because they offer newer content and people already subscribe to Comcast for other services. So it's convenient. Netflix offers a large library of old TV shows and movies as well as newly released content. Netflix has been increasing it's subscription fee and switching more licensing over to Instant, observing the trend that people are more likely to watch movies streamed Instantly than wait to receive something through the mail.
    Video stores have closed and we are seeing companies buckle under the pressure that this new competitor has placed on them. How will the film industry react if less people are actually buying the movies? Time will be the only way to tell. I doubt it'll be a long time before we can watch newly released movies for a fee through the production company's website. All I'm asking is: what's next?

Pushier than a Car Salesman?

     Earlier today I was cleaning my car and remembering how upset I was when I got it. It's a good car, but it wasn't the car I wanted. I wanted a Volvo and my parents had bought me a Toyota. Then I thought about why I wanted a Volvo...and honestly it wasn't because of design or function. It was because Edward Cullen drove one in the Twilight series. I instantly felt like I fell into the pool of crazy Twi-hards. Did I really want a car just because a fictional vampire dream man drove one?
     I thought I was reading a series for a cool story and a better past-time than watching TV but I was actually being exposed to product placement. His Volvo was constantly mentioned and made to sound like it was the cool and sophisticated car to drive. The gorgeous fashionista sister drove a BMW and Emmett, the rugged outdoor type drove a Jeep. While the author could have described the cars without naming the brands or even left the cars out (leaving them out would not have affected the story at all), she mentioned them many times. And it worked. This worries me. Where can we be safe from advertising? Is this constant flow of information some way of brainwashing people slowly? And why are brands so important to us?
    I looked through some other books I liked to read when I was a bit younger. I came across The Clique series. They mentioned Seven jeans and Keds plenty of times. I had been exposed to this stuff for years. Here I was thinking that the media didn't affect me much and I had actually been fed ads by some of my favorite books. Now I know why I find it so refreshing to read a book like The Sound and The Fury, no ads! Just like I can skip commercials on TV because of my DVR, I wish I could do that with books. It cheapens the content. But how can I know that a book I pick up will be free from this?

What do you think of brands being placed in teen books?