Our text writes of the golden age of television being a time of change as it pointed out the state of women’s’ social status in the home. I think this is a very relevant point, but besides the fact that women’s role of the stay- at- home mom/housewife was made into comedy (such as the I Love Lucy show), this act of broadcasting a live act on television sparked my interest and made me wonder how the actual programs would adapt to this style.
For one I believe viewers would see a lot more improvisational acting. The phrase “the show must go on” seems to be fitting here as obviously it would have been impossible to stop the show if a mistake in the script were to happen.
Second the improvisation would affect the comedic quality of the work. Being silly and clumsy were staples of some of the earlier shows and used positively to further the essence of the programs.
Third, the art of improvisation has a great deal to do with raw personality. I have been a performing dancer since the age of five and have done some improvisation on stage. It is a definite rush because of the rawness that is involved. Whether you’re feeling sad that day or have an abundance of energy, regardless your personality will come through on stage as it becomes impossible to “act” and be freely creating at the same time. The quirky characters that are known for this era of television are a perfect example of the effect improvisation can have on comedic acting
Monday, October 29, 2007
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
The Format Clock
The evident repetition of some radio stations has never made so much sense to me until I read about the concept of the format clock in our text. Rodman identifies the idea as a, “graphic used by radio programmers showing each of the programming hour” (p.263). Well obviously radio stations are not going to talk about their format clocks on the radio, but it would be quite interesting to find one of the local area….
Well my quest was unsuccessful, although I still find the concept interesting. No doubt some analysis of data calculates and pioneers the radio stations agenda. But the psychology behind the idea of the format clock is interesting to me. What follows with this homogeneous incentive is a dictatorship in radio culture. A few format clocks work and so, many other stations incorporate them into their own programming. What ensues is a fine example of the similarities working class people take part of.
I’ve been driving in my car at times and after tuning into one of my favorite radio stations become surprised by its content. Usually I do listen to the radio in the early morning as I’m getting ready to leave or later in the evening while I’m cooking or reading, but there have been times when I have tuned into a radio station, that I thought I knew well, only to find out that it partakes in a discussion forum from this hour to that, or it has some specialized music hour? So interestingly enough I realize that I am part of the larger statistics as well when it comes to listening to the radio at times it’s most convenient for me.
Well my quest was unsuccessful, although I still find the concept interesting. No doubt some analysis of data calculates and pioneers the radio stations agenda. But the psychology behind the idea of the format clock is interesting to me. What follows with this homogeneous incentive is a dictatorship in radio culture. A few format clocks work and so, many other stations incorporate them into their own programming. What ensues is a fine example of the similarities working class people take part of.
I’ve been driving in my car at times and after tuning into one of my favorite radio stations become surprised by its content. Usually I do listen to the radio in the early morning as I’m getting ready to leave or later in the evening while I’m cooking or reading, but there have been times when I have tuned into a radio station, that I thought I knew well, only to find out that it partakes in a discussion forum from this hour to that, or it has some specialized music hour? So interestingly enough I realize that I am part of the larger statistics as well when it comes to listening to the radio at times it’s most convenient for me.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Satellite Radio
My personal experience with satellite radio is in depth, an old friend of mine used to subscribe to Sirius satellite. During the time this person had satellite radio we went on many a road trip together, using this as our main source of entertainment while in the car. At first I was excited by the convenience it provided; you could find any type of music, not to mention news, comedy, and weather or traffic stations. I loved the easy programming methods that enabled us to install or favorite stations onto the device so at any dull moment we could just turn the radio on and push a single button to get our top five station selections out of the hundreds of options. Or text points out a few of satellite radio’s perks, such as the fact that the songs are uncensored, the device visually provides the artist’s name and song title, and they have absolutely no static (Rodman pp.246). But after some time of excitement over the instant gratification it provided I started to become less impressed with its technology and more critical of its ambiguity. A major part of why I listen to the radio is to support local stations. And I enjoy hearing the local news, and hearing about any fundraisers that are going on to support the station. I like the feeling of community that the regular FM/AM radio provides.
So now when I am driving, without the satellite radio, I don’t mind when my favorite radio station loses its signal and goes off the air, or when I am in a small town and the only stations I get are country, the local news and……..more country. I think this is not such a bad thing, its definitely not as convenient as satellite radio, but I do feel like I am engaging in community when I listen to the local radio stations.
So now when I am driving, without the satellite radio, I don’t mind when my favorite radio station loses its signal and goes off the air, or when I am in a small town and the only stations I get are country, the local news and……..more country. I think this is not such a bad thing, its definitely not as convenient as satellite radio, but I do feel like I am engaging in community when I listen to the local radio stations.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Censorship and freedom of speech
Along with the freedom of speech in the media comes controversy. Creators of art have a motivation for their work, usually it pertains to a message they want to convey and that message is not always going to be agreeable with society’s popular viewpoints at the time. Our text points out that there are four major forms of censorship today: Music labeling, governmental criticism, Chain store restrictions and radio play restrictions (Rodman pp.240). These different levels of censorship create pockets of controversy for the industry in terms of freedom and creativity. Who has the argument beat when there is a 1st amendment? Who is in the right?
In the late 1980s labeling on albums to warn the buyers of any lyrics that might be offensive were added to the cover. This led to chain store restrictions in huge corporations such as Walmart, where the albums profits are very connected. Walmart has refused the sales of albums that contain these labels and therefore initiated the recording industry to adjust to changing the album covers if need be and even in some situations the songs, so they could gain sales from these stores support.
Governmental criticism and radio play restrictions are closely tied with the public’s view that censoring what goes out on the radio is a boundary to closely set up by the government authority and squashes the concept of the first amendment. Although America does not have a completely libertarian system when it comes to the media, the government does allow some private ownership. As this system grants, some private ownership is allowed, and this could be a cause for controversial issues surrounding censorship; the government and the effects of complete freedom of speech. So in reality when I think of who is just in their point of view, the record industry and the artists or the corporations that sell their product, there is no clear choice as to what side to defend. Each side has to make its case and compromise in the end. Although I would say the artist does have has the final decision in the end; change the atmosphere of the album, or risk profits by staying true to the original intent of their artistic vision.
In the late 1980s labeling on albums to warn the buyers of any lyrics that might be offensive were added to the cover. This led to chain store restrictions in huge corporations such as Walmart, where the albums profits are very connected. Walmart has refused the sales of albums that contain these labels and therefore initiated the recording industry to adjust to changing the album covers if need be and even in some situations the songs, so they could gain sales from these stores support.
Governmental criticism and radio play restrictions are closely tied with the public’s view that censoring what goes out on the radio is a boundary to closely set up by the government authority and squashes the concept of the first amendment. Although America does not have a completely libertarian system when it comes to the media, the government does allow some private ownership. As this system grants, some private ownership is allowed, and this could be a cause for controversial issues surrounding censorship; the government and the effects of complete freedom of speech. So in reality when I think of who is just in their point of view, the record industry and the artists or the corporations that sell their product, there is no clear choice as to what side to defend. Each side has to make its case and compromise in the end. Although I would say the artist does have has the final decision in the end; change the atmosphere of the album, or risk profits by staying true to the original intent of their artistic vision.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
"Covering"
Our text states that “covering” was a concept that was surrounding the idea of profitable discrimination. Rock and roll music, which stemmed from the black community, was a mixture of “rhythm and blues, gospel, and country” (Rodman, pp.220).
A man named Elvis Presley came into the music scene around the early 1950s and shook the world with this new style of music. Well in reality he wasn’t inventing a new style of music. His style was heavily influenced by the black community and Elvis Presley brought that style into the eyes and ears of an adoring audience. People loved the music and the face of Elvis. Putting out this racy music (for its time) was of course controversial but made possible by the color of Elvis’s skin. If Elvis had been a black man putting out that same type of music, critics say he would never have been as successful.
Elvis was wonderful, I agree with his early audience, but it’s interesting to think of what would take place today if this same situation were to occur. There would be copyright law suits, race and ethics wars, and court cases would follow what would be perceived as an unjust and illegal theft of art.
Although we are I this day and age and see things from quite a different perspective than people living in the 1950s would have, I have to say that what Elvis did was in a way a great revolution for the music world. He got the ball rolling for a new level of acceptance into the music scene and popularized a new style of sound that led the way for amazing artists to acquire popularity through their own renditions of that musical general.
Rock and roll in 1950 and rock and roll in 2007 are immensely different, but it’s fascinating that they have the same birthplace. Now that people in general have a much more liberal and open-minded stance on music, and art in general, we can look back and appreciate rock and roll’s true roots. This level of appreciation that we have for the black community’s sound is long overdue, but at the same time creates an education for the music world of today to place an importance on the art itself and not the face on the album cover.
When I was younger and listening to music groups, a big part of my satisfaction came from the artists’ appearance. I would classify there music style by how they looked and in turn identify myself with their style as well. As I’ve grown I’ve come to greatly appreciate the art of music itself, and hear the composition and creativity of the artist a lot more loudly than their clothing or hair style.
A man named Elvis Presley came into the music scene around the early 1950s and shook the world with this new style of music. Well in reality he wasn’t inventing a new style of music. His style was heavily influenced by the black community and Elvis Presley brought that style into the eyes and ears of an adoring audience. People loved the music and the face of Elvis. Putting out this racy music (for its time) was of course controversial but made possible by the color of Elvis’s skin. If Elvis had been a black man putting out that same type of music, critics say he would never have been as successful.
Elvis was wonderful, I agree with his early audience, but it’s interesting to think of what would take place today if this same situation were to occur. There would be copyright law suits, race and ethics wars, and court cases would follow what would be perceived as an unjust and illegal theft of art.
Although we are I this day and age and see things from quite a different perspective than people living in the 1950s would have, I have to say that what Elvis did was in a way a great revolution for the music world. He got the ball rolling for a new level of acceptance into the music scene and popularized a new style of sound that led the way for amazing artists to acquire popularity through their own renditions of that musical general.
Rock and roll in 1950 and rock and roll in 2007 are immensely different, but it’s fascinating that they have the same birthplace. Now that people in general have a much more liberal and open-minded stance on music, and art in general, we can look back and appreciate rock and roll’s true roots. This level of appreciation that we have for the black community’s sound is long overdue, but at the same time creates an education for the music world of today to place an importance on the art itself and not the face on the album cover.
When I was younger and listening to music groups, a big part of my satisfaction came from the artists’ appearance. I would classify there music style by how they looked and in turn identify myself with their style as well. As I’ve grown I’ve come to greatly appreciate the art of music itself, and hear the composition and creativity of the artist a lot more loudly than their clothing or hair style.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Censorship of movies?
The first rating system which was put into place in 1930 is somewhat different from the scale we have now. Our rating scale which is divided up into five different categories of parental suggested guidance. NC-17 suggests that no children under age 17 should be admitted regardless if the parent is willing to let the child view the film or not. R rating is put into place to suggest that anyone under the age of 17 needs to be accompanied by a parent. PG-13 is set up so that anyone under the age of 13 needs to be accompanied by a parent if viewing the film. PG simply means parental guidance suggested, and the G rating is meant to say that anyone of any age is welcome to view that film.
The text states that these ratings are controversial because the enforcement needed to back these ratings up is not very strong. The infringement due to the ratings themselves is a completely voluntary censorship, which means some control issues for producers.
I remember being under the age of seventeen and wanting to see R rated movies in theatres. It’s funny because I remember my parents being uncomfortable with bringing me to see them in the theatres. But at home it was a different story. I recall seeing movies such as Stephen King’s IT and all the Friday the 13th movies before the age of 11 years old.
Besides creating a suggested level of censorship the current movie ratings create a societal standard that is suggested for parents to follow. Well some parents will follow the suggestion to heart and agree with it, others won’t. Some parents will just wait until the films come out on DVD rent it and watch it at home with their children, which in the end take away profit from the theatres. This rating scale is an attempt to create order of some kind, and also to some degree put into place to help prevent protests against the theatres for showing kids movies that they might not be emotionally ready for. In the end each family and child is different and it is the parent who creates the rating scale specific for their child.
The text states that these ratings are controversial because the enforcement needed to back these ratings up is not very strong. The infringement due to the ratings themselves is a completely voluntary censorship, which means some control issues for producers.
I remember being under the age of seventeen and wanting to see R rated movies in theatres. It’s funny because I remember my parents being uncomfortable with bringing me to see them in the theatres. But at home it was a different story. I recall seeing movies such as Stephen King’s IT and all the Friday the 13th movies before the age of 11 years old.
Besides creating a suggested level of censorship the current movie ratings create a societal standard that is suggested for parents to follow. Well some parents will follow the suggestion to heart and agree with it, others won’t. Some parents will just wait until the films come out on DVD rent it and watch it at home with their children, which in the end take away profit from the theatres. This rating scale is an attempt to create order of some kind, and also to some degree put into place to help prevent protests against the theatres for showing kids movies that they might not be emotionally ready for. In the end each family and child is different and it is the parent who creates the rating scale specific for their child.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Native American press
Our text comments on ethnic presses and how they relate to change in the concept of news. More specifically a change in how society relates its values and politics to one another.
The Native American press was founded 1828 in Georgia. A tribal leader for the Cherokee peoples decided to embark on this form of mass communication because he believed that literacy was the root of the white mans power and so wanted his people to engage in that power as well. The paper was first named Cherokee Phoenix, but upon moving to Oklahoma the paper’s name was changed to Cherokee Advocate.
Some interesting things about the paper include…….
1. The type was cast in the Cherokee language
2. The man who started the paper felt that the issues confronting the Cherokee tribe were not specific to them, but included other tribes as well so the name changed from Cherokee Phoenix to Cherokee Advocate in the year of 1829
3. You can read the Cherokee Phoenix from archives dating back to 1829.
Besides transmitting important information about social and political issues this paper was a small revolution in diversity and integration. The Cherokee Advocate started this thought even with the expansion of the paper from changing the name when it first started out. The mission behind the paper understood that by reaching more people, more readers, that one thing in common can create unity, a community for social change. Making what’s known and important to a specific group accessible to anyone at all brings about a small scale equality of freedom for the minority groups.
The Native American press was founded 1828 in Georgia. A tribal leader for the Cherokee peoples decided to embark on this form of mass communication because he believed that literacy was the root of the white mans power and so wanted his people to engage in that power as well. The paper was first named Cherokee Phoenix, but upon moving to Oklahoma the paper’s name was changed to Cherokee Advocate.
Some interesting things about the paper include…….
1. The type was cast in the Cherokee language
2. The man who started the paper felt that the issues confronting the Cherokee tribe were not specific to them, but included other tribes as well so the name changed from Cherokee Phoenix to Cherokee Advocate in the year of 1829
3. You can read the Cherokee Phoenix from archives dating back to 1829.
Besides transmitting important information about social and political issues this paper was a small revolution in diversity and integration. The Cherokee Advocate started this thought even with the expansion of the paper from changing the name when it first started out. The mission behind the paper understood that by reaching more people, more readers, that one thing in common can create unity, a community for social change. Making what’s known and important to a specific group accessible to anyone at all brings about a small scale equality of freedom for the minority groups.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)