Last year, my early adopter friend snagged an I-phone, and wasn’t afraid to use it. Whether she was texting while meeting her boyfriend’s parents at a restaurant, updating her Facebook status, or playing her music, her I-phone was always there for her. In fact, her boyfriend got so annoyed that he commented on her new toy: “Your I-phone is I-nnoying!” I though that was humorous, however, he is having the last laugh. My boyfriend, Steve, just bought a new I-phone two weeks ago, and I am now faced with a similar situation. When we are watching TV, he is checking the Internet on his I-phone for game stats. When we are looking for restaurants to eat at, he is playing the random selection game on his Urban Spoon application. When we are heading to a destination to which I know directions, he is right there driving and using his GPS and mapping system on his dumb I-phone. Will I-phones replace computers for Internet browsing, and will I continually be I-nnoyed?
Through the utilization of the uses and gratification theory, I could gain insight into what needs are being fulfilled through Steve’s active role as user of his I-phone. Therefore, I conducted a simulated focus group of one to explore this. Now, I realize that focus groups consist of more than one person but I wanted to pose a couple of open-ended questions to Steve to uncover this phenomenon and receive honest data (we can pretend that he wasn’t the only subject).
The participants of the study commented that access to information, ease of use, and integrated technology (i-pod, phone, Internet, texting) were the key reasons for using the I-phone. One participant commented, “the learning curve is small, so it is so easy to learn to operate without a manual”. One participant commented that the I-phone acts as a problem-solver: “It is a security blanket when I leave home”. Key applications used by participants were sports (scores, stats, game times and places), restaurant guides, maps, weather guides, movie guides, email, and Facebook. Participants could see themselves spending less time on the computer because of the I-phone. A participant claimed that “Information is 2 or 3 taps away” to explain why computer use would decline, as the applications on the I-phone are easier to use than web browsing. Participants also commented on the I-phone’s flashy appearance and the status recognition that goes along with the I-phone.
Through my intimate and simulated focus group, I have found that the I-phone does serve many needs for people, especially the need for quick and easy information access and use. As technology grows, I can only hope that nothing more I-nnoying than the I-phone will surface. Maybe I should conduct a real focus group and present my scholarly findings?!
Monday, November 30, 2009
New Moon: Who is Summit Entertainment?
I was curious to see what media conglomerate had its arms wrapped around the second movie in the Twilight series, New Moon. I was stunned to see the arms of an unfamiliar film production company called Summit Entertainment, LLC. Who are these guys?
From their website, it appears they are a “worldwide theatrical motion picture development, financing, production, and distribution studio.” I find this very interesting, along with some other facts. First, the company intends on rolling out 10-12 films a year. This number seems very small to me. I attempted to find out how many films are released a year from Touchstone Pictures and Miramax Films (Walt Disney Corp.), but I could not find a number for comparison, unfortunately. Secondly, Summit Entertainment is a limited liability company, which means there are no stock options and ownership is smaller in size. This organizational makeup is a deep contrast from the big media conglomerates.
According to recent news on http://www.newmoonmovie.org/, (reported by Gossip Cop) New Moon has topped the charts at $437.7 million worldwide for box office sales. If I were one of the large media conglomerates, I would ask myself how I lost this sweet venture that has great product tie-in opportunities with the soundtrack, book series (publishing company), board games, and fast food meal deals. The book’s publishing company is not owned by Summit Entertainment, but it appears that Summit struck a deal with Atlantic Records for the soundtrack. In addition, Summit has a deal with Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc. and Screenlife, as the Scene It?® Twilight™ game release appeared as news in the “News” section of their webpage in September. Lastly, everyone has seen the Burger King commercials with Team Jacob and Team Edward. Not only will New Moon get additional advertising, but Burger King will reap benefits through their sales of New Moon packaged meals, New Moon BK Crown Cards (gift cards with New Moon scenes- the perfect gift for kids from mom and dad), and $9.99 eco-friendly water bottles that have mugs of either Jacob or Edward to support their teams (http://www.bk.com/en/us/campaigns/new-moon.html). I can bet teenagers are having a heyday with these water bottles.
So, just what are the implications of Summit Entertainment having a hold on the Twilight series? Well, it means more competition in a marketplace where other media conglomerates have overshadowed the film industry. However, despite how small Summit Entertainment may seem, I have trouble believing it is the small, independent film company people believe it to be. Below is a list of some of their notable films. Strategy and revenue are up their sleeves, just like all the others, and it will only be a matter of time before they establish themselves in the media marketplace, or are bought out by News Corp., Walt Disney Corporation, General Electric, or one of the other 500 lb. gorillas.
Some notable films:
American Pie
Michael Clayton
Mr. & Mrs. Smith
Neverending Story
Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants
The Shawshank Redemption
Sahara
P.S. I Love You
Resident Evil
From their website, it appears they are a “worldwide theatrical motion picture development, financing, production, and distribution studio.” I find this very interesting, along with some other facts. First, the company intends on rolling out 10-12 films a year. This number seems very small to me. I attempted to find out how many films are released a year from Touchstone Pictures and Miramax Films (Walt Disney Corp.), but I could not find a number for comparison, unfortunately. Secondly, Summit Entertainment is a limited liability company, which means there are no stock options and ownership is smaller in size. This organizational makeup is a deep contrast from the big media conglomerates.
According to recent news on http://www.newmoonmovie.org/, (reported by Gossip Cop) New Moon has topped the charts at $437.7 million worldwide for box office sales. If I were one of the large media conglomerates, I would ask myself how I lost this sweet venture that has great product tie-in opportunities with the soundtrack, book series (publishing company), board games, and fast food meal deals. The book’s publishing company is not owned by Summit Entertainment, but it appears that Summit struck a deal with Atlantic Records for the soundtrack. In addition, Summit has a deal with Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc. and Screenlife, as the Scene It?® Twilight™ game release appeared as news in the “News” section of their webpage in September. Lastly, everyone has seen the Burger King commercials with Team Jacob and Team Edward. Not only will New Moon get additional advertising, but Burger King will reap benefits through their sales of New Moon packaged meals, New Moon BK Crown Cards (gift cards with New Moon scenes- the perfect gift for kids from mom and dad), and $9.99 eco-friendly water bottles that have mugs of either Jacob or Edward to support their teams (http://www.bk.com/en/us/campaigns/new-moon.html). I can bet teenagers are having a heyday with these water bottles.
So, just what are the implications of Summit Entertainment having a hold on the Twilight series? Well, it means more competition in a marketplace where other media conglomerates have overshadowed the film industry. However, despite how small Summit Entertainment may seem, I have trouble believing it is the small, independent film company people believe it to be. Below is a list of some of their notable films. Strategy and revenue are up their sleeves, just like all the others, and it will only be a matter of time before they establish themselves in the media marketplace, or are bought out by News Corp., Walt Disney Corporation, General Electric, or one of the other 500 lb. gorillas.
Some notable films:
American Pie
Michael Clayton
Mr. & Mrs. Smith
Neverending Story
Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants
The Shawshank Redemption
Sahara
P.S. I Love You
Resident Evil
SparkNotes: Friend or Foe?
Pray tell, what’s in a name and where art thou, SparkNotes? You are reducing literary classics to condensed, yet quite informative summaries. You are in my future students’ book bags (printed copies), on their desks at home, and in the permanent “favorites” on their Internet browser, slowly defying English teachers’ instructions for students to READ THE BOOK! The PBS documentary, “Growing up Online”, illustrated the growing number of students (8 out of 10) that use summaries online as opposed to reading the assigned books. The students’ excuse? “We don’t have enough time!” Well, maybe if they would sign out of Facebook, power off the video games, and quick texting, there would be more time to squeeze in 15-20 pages a night before bed!
The “8 out of 10 student” statistic can’t be far from the truth. On Thanksgiving, I asked my boyfriend’s cousins (two very bright high school students) what they were reading for literature in class. The extroverted cousin answered with a rant about the crappy literature they have to read and how they always use SparkNotes and get A’s anyway. Now, I was a little surprised to hear this from the scholar who makes the honor roll, plays the cello, holds a seat in the student council, and travels to nationals in New York for the debate team. Even the straight-A students are guilty of finding a virtual friend in SparkNotes. Who is to blame? The universities that expect students to be well-rounded in all areas (sports, band or choir, leadership, and volunteering), the students of the digital age who have limited attention spans and can’t peel themselves from the computer, or the “boring” (as quoted by Renee) literature? Most likely all of them are to blame to some extent.
So, what is an educator to do with this competing technology that is free and very accessible? The documentary suggested two ways to approach this problem. Fight technology, or accept technology and the way the world works now. If students like my boyfriend’s cousins are using it, then I don’t know if I have a choice but to lay down my sword and understand that all of my students won't be reading texts in their entirety. Some things I can do for my class to promote a full reading include: more choice in literature, paced reading schedules, and time in class for silent reading. According to author Rick Wormeli (a middle school guru), teachers are supposed to assess students based on an understanding of the concepts("mastery of content and skill"), not on effort and whether they did the full reading assignment. Would it be fair to give a bad grade to a student who did very little reading all year, yet passed each test with flying colors, demonstrating an understanding of the material? No, I don’t think so. It would be punishment for mastery.
As a future teacher, I will encourage my students to read the entire text. However, just as I can’t make my friends call me (many only text), I can’t make students read every page when they have a new technology at their fingertips that make things so much easier for them. Are they cheating? Ask Shakespeare, Twain, and Hawthorne… or would the technology overwhelm them too much?
The “8 out of 10 student” statistic can’t be far from the truth. On Thanksgiving, I asked my boyfriend’s cousins (two very bright high school students) what they were reading for literature in class. The extroverted cousin answered with a rant about the crappy literature they have to read and how they always use SparkNotes and get A’s anyway. Now, I was a little surprised to hear this from the scholar who makes the honor roll, plays the cello, holds a seat in the student council, and travels to nationals in New York for the debate team. Even the straight-A students are guilty of finding a virtual friend in SparkNotes. Who is to blame? The universities that expect students to be well-rounded in all areas (sports, band or choir, leadership, and volunteering), the students of the digital age who have limited attention spans and can’t peel themselves from the computer, or the “boring” (as quoted by Renee) literature? Most likely all of them are to blame to some extent.
So, what is an educator to do with this competing technology that is free and very accessible? The documentary suggested two ways to approach this problem. Fight technology, or accept technology and the way the world works now. If students like my boyfriend’s cousins are using it, then I don’t know if I have a choice but to lay down my sword and understand that all of my students won't be reading texts in their entirety. Some things I can do for my class to promote a full reading include: more choice in literature, paced reading schedules, and time in class for silent reading. According to author Rick Wormeli (a middle school guru), teachers are supposed to assess students based on an understanding of the concepts("mastery of content and skill"), not on effort and whether they did the full reading assignment. Would it be fair to give a bad grade to a student who did very little reading all year, yet passed each test with flying colors, demonstrating an understanding of the material? No, I don’t think so. It would be punishment for mastery.
As a future teacher, I will encourage my students to read the entire text. However, just as I can’t make my friends call me (many only text), I can’t make students read every page when they have a new technology at their fingertips that make things so much easier for them. Are they cheating? Ask Shakespeare, Twain, and Hawthorne… or would the technology overwhelm them too much?
“Oops I Did it Again!”
Since I am blogging it up, I decided to visit Mr. Seacrest’s page to see what types of advertising and pop news saturate his website. Was I in for a mass communication treat! One of the headlines read: “I’m Not a Babysitter- I’m a Performer", and covered the racy story of Adam Lambert's smooch with a male keyboardist and some other bold dance moves at the American Music Awards performance on November 22nd. Access Hollywood caught up with Adam, also, and the video below gives you an idea of what the performance looked like, along with Adam's own comments. Due to the sexually charged show, runner-up American idol star Lambert’s “Good Morning, America” performance for the following day was cancelled by ABC. According to a Rolling Stone article, there were 1,500 complaints telephoned into ABC regarding the risqué performance. Now, we can all recall the Madonna make-out sessions with Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera back in 2003 on the MTV Video Music Awards. It would be interesting to discuss and analyze double standards, normative versus non-normative behavior, and the sexual acts of pop stars on the stage from the past, but maybe a different day.
I am more concerned with how this particular incident fits in nicely with our recent class topic of media conglomerates. The Walt Disney Corporation owns ABC through a $19 billion deal in 1995 (Severin & Tankard, Jr., 2001, p. 348). In my view, Disney is a conservative company in terms of content. The Disney empire (theme parks, animated and feature films, and publishing) caters to a young target market. Did Disney cut the Lambert performance from ABC’s “Good Morning, America” because it could tarnish the company’s conservative reputation? Although I am not certain, I assume they are playing it safe in an unexplored territory of pop culture society. It does bother me that the media has great control on what we see and what we don’t see. From our reading of media conglomerates, there was a story about ABC’s program, 20/20, intending to do a news story on the dangers of theme-parks due to pedophilia and poor security (Severin & Tankard, Jr., 2001, p. 361). Since Disney was one of the theme-parks named, the story was shot down. In media conglomerates, CEOs and strategists need to leverage all of their media companies, and in doing so, must work together within all media channels to promote revenue- not losses! This means being partial and withholding information if necessary.
So, if we know Disney will have ABC censor content that could be risky for the conservative reputation and the potential profits in a particular business, what else do they censor? If the lifeblood of the media is pure profits, I would have to agree with Suda on many of her viewpoints throughout the semester. The mass media are all around us, and we are forced to digest it in its profit-driven form. The only way to avoid it is to live like Thoreau in the woods. Mr. Lambert showed the world a sex-based performance (as pop culture demands), yet he may have hurt himself more by wrestling with a 500 lb. gorilla that has the final call on content. I am curious to see if ABC can forgive him, and how this performance will affect his career. Luckily, his brand new album, “For Your Entertainment”, was produced by RCA, which is currently owned by Sony and Bertelsmann (50/50 ownership). I wonder how many musical entertainers have been under fire by a media conglomerate, and how the issue was handled. I’m pretty sure it gets nasty.
Severin, W. J. & Tankard, Jr., J. (2001).Communication theories: Origins,
methods, and uses in the mass media(5th ed.). New York, NY: Longman, 348,361.
I am more concerned with how this particular incident fits in nicely with our recent class topic of media conglomerates. The Walt Disney Corporation owns ABC through a $19 billion deal in 1995 (Severin & Tankard, Jr., 2001, p. 348). In my view, Disney is a conservative company in terms of content. The Disney empire (theme parks, animated and feature films, and publishing) caters to a young target market. Did Disney cut the Lambert performance from ABC’s “Good Morning, America” because it could tarnish the company’s conservative reputation? Although I am not certain, I assume they are playing it safe in an unexplored territory of pop culture society. It does bother me that the media has great control on what we see and what we don’t see. From our reading of media conglomerates, there was a story about ABC’s program, 20/20, intending to do a news story on the dangers of theme-parks due to pedophilia and poor security (Severin & Tankard, Jr., 2001, p. 361). Since Disney was one of the theme-parks named, the story was shot down. In media conglomerates, CEOs and strategists need to leverage all of their media companies, and in doing so, must work together within all media channels to promote revenue- not losses! This means being partial and withholding information if necessary.
So, if we know Disney will have ABC censor content that could be risky for the conservative reputation and the potential profits in a particular business, what else do they censor? If the lifeblood of the media is pure profits, I would have to agree with Suda on many of her viewpoints throughout the semester. The mass media are all around us, and we are forced to digest it in its profit-driven form. The only way to avoid it is to live like Thoreau in the woods. Mr. Lambert showed the world a sex-based performance (as pop culture demands), yet he may have hurt himself more by wrestling with a 500 lb. gorilla that has the final call on content. I am curious to see if ABC can forgive him, and how this performance will affect his career. Luckily, his brand new album, “For Your Entertainment”, was produced by RCA, which is currently owned by Sony and Bertelsmann (50/50 ownership). I wonder how many musical entertainers have been under fire by a media conglomerate, and how the issue was handled. I’m pretty sure it gets nasty.
Severin, W. J. & Tankard, Jr., J. (2001).Communication theories: Origins,
methods, and uses in the mass media(5th ed.). New York, NY: Longman, 348,361.
Ryan Seacrest Rides the Clear Channel Waves
On my drive to school and other locations, I normally listen to whatever I have in my car CD player, Cities 97, or 102.9 FM in the months of November and December (for the Christmas music). Occasionally, I will listen to KDWB's morning show. Throughout the past few months, I have noticed that KDWB no longer has a live DJ throughout the mid-morning to late afternoon hours like they have had in the past. Instead, I hear the obnoxious voice of Ryan Seacrest, who imparts more gossip and pop songs than even I can handle. What happened to these live DJs? Why do KDWB listeners have to be at the mercy of Ryan Seacrest for 3-5 hours?
After doing some research, I discovered that as of February 28, 2008, Clear Channel (the company that owns KDWB and 1000 other radio stations) and Ryan Seacrest formed a partnership to produce the live radio show venture hosted by Seacrest (http://www.clearchannel.com/Radio/PressRelease.aspx?PressReleaseID=2140). The show revolves around pop culture entertainment in music, film, and television. The article stated: “It is a multi-platform deal in which Seacrest develops on-air content, hosts the program, distributes some elements across other platforms, and provides a portion of integrated advertising options.” Our class has discussed Clear Channel as a huge company with a large holding in radio stations and outdoor advertising, and an example of one of the four traditional gatekeepers of the music industry. Additionally, our class has spent time examining pop culture and its place in society.
It is amazing that one company can own and control so many radio stations and the content. I know from traveling to Jacksonville, FL, that the content heard on KISS FM has the same pop songs and Seacrest red carpet news that KDWB does. I am disappointed that radio fails to be diversified. Even MN stations like KS95 and Jack 104.1 are rolling out the pop songs more than ever before. In terms of Clear Channel radio stations playing the role of gatekeeper, artists will continue to lose money when their songs play frequently and for free on the waves. The film “Money for Nothing: Behind the Business of Pop Music” really opened my eyes to the costs incurred by music artists and the obstacles they face through the channels by which their music is spread. People wonder why musicians like TLC or Britney Spears could ever go broke, and it is apparent when you examine fees for touring (use of venues), the recording studio, and distribution costs. However, this radio show is not without benefits to pop stars; Seacrest does live interviews and provides advertising for touring artists on his website, www.ryanseacrest.com, which was re-launched with the start of his show.
As I reflect on how Clear Channel’s pop god messenger, Ryan Seacrest, has ruined countless hours of radio waves, I can only thank my lucky stars that I have retired KDWB (except for the morning show) as a station of choice, and I am mature and well-rounded enough to embrace more complex material than “My my my poker face my my poker face…” or “Party in the USA”. I just want to thank my CD player for being a trusty “gatekeeper” from some of the redundant pop crap out there.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
