galina international

Sunday, September 9, 2012

OutFoxed: Media

Galina Rolf

Outfoxed: Media

When a breaking news story hits the airways people depend on their news stations to report the story accurately and without bias, so why is the same story reported in so many different ways? The media has a variety of approaches to research, and unfortunately what is reported and how it is reported is sometimes due to the political culture and bias of a particular news station. Other types of media are influenced by politics, biases, and opinions. Sitcoms, reality TV, movies, specials, and news broadcasts are all tainted by the views of the creator of the shows, cultural norms and society’s values.

The media affects not only adults but children. Approaches to protect the youth viewing and listening to the media, presents in cycles. The media will periodically run programs about the violence children are exposed to and the effects that violence has on their development. Yet more often than not the right to a free press and free speech are hid behind as the rationalization for violent material presented in view of the children. The media plays a big role in society and the development of cultural values. Media stars are imitated, their words taken as truth, and their opinions accepted as fact. This is evidenced by all of the toys and product, marketed and sold to adults and children that represent their favorite media stars. The viewing and reading public, children and adults as well are not only influenced by what they the media reports but who and how they report it. The industry has an ethical responsibility to the viewing public. Many times the media is the self appointed, moral watchdog for the world’s leaders; but who is the moral watch dog for the media? Hopefully the public is astute enough to not be “outfoxed” by any media presenter.

In addition to the effects media has on the public, a film, Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism, is a reflection on The Fox News Channel station and other stations that evaluates the false or true messages throughout the media. The film was a review of the influences and power the news media has on the viewer’s perception of certain areas of the world. The News colors the viewer’s perception of politics and political leaders in every area of the world. What the viewer knows about a counties culture is dependent upon how it is represented. What should be believed after viewing the film Outfoxed? What are the objectives that Fox News has adopted in reporting to public audiences? What are the views of this college student on the fairness of the Fox News Channel?

The Fox News Channel has a responsibility to the viewing public entertain and to give the audiences information, details, and their point of view on society. Fox News Channel is more conservative in their reports of the news than the mainstream media which is more liberal. The Fox news channel does allow both the conservatives and the liberal to speak but often times them slant the news toward the conservative. If we criticize fox news for their conservative view point then we must also criticize CBS, NBC, and ABC for their liberal presentation of the same news. There have been many programs that have been introduced to the public that advertise the fact that they are totally in the center with their political views “Rock Center” is one. This program would not have the backing to be produced if there was not a need for the news to be reported more fairly.

Should Fox News be allowed to report the News with a conservative spin? The answer is not a simple one. The Fox News Station is split into three evening shows. The first two are more news and less opinion. The third group of shows features conservative talk shows and views presented in a conservative manner. As a result to this, there is a known fact that when you view The Fox News Channel most of the speakers on the show have Conservative leanings. Also, Fox News is producing both the news and entertainment shows. The Fox Network invites individuals, stars, or political professionals to speak on the show for discussion. In the film and Fox News channel appears to be bias because the later evening talk shows are produced from the conservative point of view. These shows sacrifice objectivity for entertainment and they do make a great deal of money by producing these conservative talk shows. Just like the warning on cigarettes Fox and the other news programs should warn and identify clearly what is news, what is opinion, and what is entertainment.

This college student has watched Fox news with her father for years, gleaning important details and information on a variety of subjects I do think the station is Conservative but still is not any more bias than any of the liberal News Programs. I believe strongly that Fox News gives both facts and their point of view to their viewers who watch the show. As a result, Fox News reports facts about certain situations, comments on politics which is extremely important during the elections this year. I believe that it is important to use the filter of common sense when listening to any news program and that when choosing a president the responsible voter should chose many different sources to gain information from including looking at voting records of the two leading candidates. As well as paying a close attention to the vice-presidential candidates.

All media is bias because it is based upon the opinions and backgrounds of those reporting the news or creating a show. Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism, was certainly a bias film, rooted in fact but reported with an anti-Fox slant. Several weeks ago the fast food chain “Chick-Fil-a was in the news for refusing to open on Sunday and then again for only supporting one man one woman marriages. Many stations reported this news all with a different spin and bias. As an example of how the world might view the US culture, below I am adding a link to two different slants on this subject.

Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day Sparks Nationwide Turnout! - Eric

Produced by the “ Right”

Chick Fil A

Produced by Liberalegg

Galina Rolf

Outfoxed: Media

Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day Sparks Nationwide Turnout! - Eric

Produced by the “ Right”

Chick Fil A

Produced by Liberalegg

Monday, August 27, 2012

The Truman Show Blog 1

The Truman Show

Blog 1

Galina Rolf

The Truman Show was released in 1998. The movie is meant to be a warning to viewers as to how much power the Television watching public has given the media. The movie makes the case that the power of the media is many times used unethically and unwisely. Even though the power that the media holds has been given to them by the viewers it often times influences the lives of the viewers, actors, and innocent participants in a negative way. The Truman Show exemplifies the problems with media when it is run by ratings and is devoid of morality. It shows how the viewing public changes its perceptions and expectations of life. Certainly there are positive aspects of the media but the Truman Show was an example of media power and greed “gone wild”. The media plays a big role in American society, culture, and values. The media also affects how other countries perceive the United States and how people in the United States perceive other countries and cultures. The reality T.V. shows such as the Truman show require financing to produce and the media finds sponsors, so not only are the producers of television and movies promoting certain perceptions they are promoting the products that finance their shows. Archeologists of the future could glean from watching Television that most of the men in American society are having difficulties with impotence and need male enhancement drugs to improve their performance, women require the perfect color for their hair to remain attractive, and that the children in our society must have the latest gadgets to be happy and successful. The mass media has a tremendous almost scary effect on the public and yet censorship and restriction of content among programing presents other problems such as restricting the freedoms our forefathers fought for. Where is the line public pleasure in viewing and private abuse of innocent individuals? Recognizing that The Truman Show was an exaggeration of the evils of the media there was still enough truth in it to warn the viewing public and those employed in media to evaluate their actions and question their ethics.

In the Truman Show, the main character, Truman Burbank and his life becomes a reality television show that is shown throughout the globe. Burbank’s distorted reality begins at birth continues through childhood and adulthood. During this time Truman is continually monitored on camera for the entire world to see. Truman is loved superficially by the public but all of the important people in his life are actors and producers. For Truman there is no free will or free choice his life is manipulated and contrived. The viewing public takes pleasure in this show because Truman’s life is “perfect”. They do not question the morality of the show because it gives them pleasure and a sense that they are part of raising a child who is living the perfect life. It never occurs to them that Truman will one day be confronted by the fact that not one person in his life actually loves him and that his entire life is a life. This is not only gross imposition on the privacy of his life but an abuse perpetuated by the media and the viewer. The producers appear to only be concerned about themselves, their jobs, and the money that they make. The viewers are concerned about their entertainment and Truman the Television personality. All of the players have their own agenda and virtually none care about Truman the person. Burbank’s has no clue of what is happening behind the scenes, while he goes on with his life. This is the moral and ethical line that the public and the media producers cross. Everyone profits in Burbank’s life except Truman. He has lost all of his rights as a human being while the rights of the public to exercise right of free speech ect. is protected. The warning to all is that it should not be permitted to exploit one for the benefit and profits of others. Most people would recognize that the murder of an individual on television for profits and ratings is unacceptable. What happened to Truman was the murder of a life without the violence.

So, where is the line between what the public can ethically expect from people in the public eye and what should remain private? All make choices and decisions in our daily life, while surrounded and influenced by varieties of media. Celebrities such as Movie stars, Pop artists, politicians and professional athletes are a part of the media and public scrutiny but the public does not own these people and does not have the right to exploit them as people. In every single report that a journalist makes or communicates to the public he or she must ask am what I am doing ethically correct. As United States Citizens a few years ago we came very close to watching filming an execution. I was very glad that The Timothy McVeigh execution was not televised although the details were reported almost gleefully it is definitely crossing an ethical line to record it. Relating small bits of personal news like telling the world that Jennifer Lawrence’s owns a cute pet on the E-news is acceptable. Reporting about the crooked dealings or the unfaithfulness of a politician is acceptable because it protects the public from the misdeeds of those that are governing them. Media in general is responsible to the public to maintain the honesty and ethical purity expected of the celebrities and politicians they report on. all for show. Truman Burbank’s life was absolutely public to the eye of the world without his consent or knowledge this is an ethical violation of the worst kind.

In addition to what is public versus what is private, where are the borders between real life, and what is actually a performance? Truman Burbank’s life throughout the movie was surrounded by performance; even though he seemed like he was involved in living he was being manipulated for the camera and used for personal and private gain of all. camera The reality of The Truman Show was that people watched and felt a part of Truman’s plastic life. The whole of the scenes, and places, that Truman thought was real was fake reality. Burbank was being used to actually live in a show by people that wanted him to be the main star for their productions, add to their accomplishments, and perpetuate their achievements by creating a show that wasn’t a show at all but the destruction of a person. It was not until the public saw the destruction that they cause that they developed a weak conscience and yet the media behind the façade continued until they had no choice but to recognize how truly corrupt they were in the exploitation of Truman Burbank. Journalists, producers, and those that we have entrusted in reporting the events around us and providing us with entertainment have a responsibility to realize when they are invading a person’s privacy and when they are reporting/producing newsworthy information. All of their work should be done considering ethics/ morality first and personal gain, accomplishment, and achievement second.

Monday, November 21, 2011

Immigration

Immigration Blog

Most of think that we know everything there is to know about immigration. We also have our minds made up about how we feel about the problems with the numbers of our illegal immigrants. What most people don’t have is the cultural background on how our immigration population became so large. According to our text book our most recent immigrants are called New Immigrants. New immigrants refers to people who have migrated to the United States after 1960. Most of these individuals are refugee’s, indigent, and desperate. Miller, the author of our text book indicates that three trends characterize the new immigrant: Globalization, Acceleration, and feminism. In 1965 ammendments to the Naturalization Act made it possible for many more immigrants to enter the U.S. The amendments allowed people with specific skills to enter the country and our workforce. Later the family reunification clause allowed residents and citizens to bring immediate family members to the United States. This caused an overflow of immigrants into the population. Although this group of immigrants caused a shift economically and in the job markets it is not the legal immigrants that we are constantly hearing about. (Miller, 2010)

You cannot open a newspaper, listen to talk radio, or watch the news on television without hearing about illegal immigrants. If many of the immigrants that enter the country legally are refugees why aren’t the immigrants that cross the Rio Grande prepared to enter legally. I think that the answer to this question has to do with quotas the government imposes on certain people, with certain occupations, from certain countries. I can understand that economically an unskilled laborer will not benefit our country as much as an educated immigrant in the medical field would but I can’t help but remember that our country was colonized by people who had been in prison, persecuted for their religious beliefs, or could not pay their debts. Somehow we survived and developed a political and economical system that grew to be amazing in the process. Instead of just mere survival our ancestors thrived. I understand that we are in difficult times. I realize that we are facing a financial crisis but I am not sure that our present handling of our illegal immigrants will solve our economic problems.

I would like to concentrate on the Mexican immigrants that enter the country by crossing the Rio Grande. When I think about these individuals I think about how desperate their lives must be that they would attempt to cross a river that is guarded by the police. These individuals risk incarceration, physical brutality, rape, even death to cross into the United States. Those who have the resolve and strength to make it into the country may walk hundreds of miles to find work in the fields harvesting crops. The pay is of course below minimum wage. Many people are outraged by these illegal immigrants they scream that they are taking American jobs. I wonder how many Americans would consider accepting the jobs that the illegal immigrants have taken. I would guess that most Americans would not even consider working under the same conditions that our Mexican brothers and sisters are willing to accept. We out source jobs in financially distressed countries all over the world. If we can do this do we have the rights to complain about illegal immigrants taking jobs from Americans inside the country that most American not only do not want but would never work?

We hear Americans lamenting the death of a loved one at the hands of an illegal immigrant. The pain is very real to these families and I sympathize but how many Americans kill American each year. Does that mean that all Americans are murderers?

These are a few arguments that we hear voiced against the illegal Mexican immigrants. What I see are people who have taken tremendous risks to support themselves and their families. I see hard working individuals who are willing to work under less than optimal conditions. I also notice that we as Americans villianize and criminalize these individuals whose real crime is wanting a better life.

The illegal immigrants that are caught in our country are put into federal prisons until they can be deported. The process is not a short one and they are not isolated. Illegal immigrants are incarcerated with rapists, murderers, and arsonists. Many of these people are women who have never committed a crime other than illegally entering the country. If these women have children who were born in the United Sates the mothers are deported while their children stay in the country.

To me there is something Un-American about the way that we have treated Mexican illegal immigrants. The Statue of Liberty has an inscription on it written by Emily Lazarus. The inscription reads:

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest tossed,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

If we continue to treat illegal immigrants the way that we do we may have to delete the inscription on the Statue of Liberty.

Work Cited

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2014097534_apusillegalimmigration.html

http://www.urban.org/health_policy/url.cfm?ID=1000587 Reem Saad (May 2006). "Egyptian Workers in Paris:, Pilot Ethnography". SRC, American University in Cairo.

The undocumented Africans "of St. Ambroise" Bok.net. Retrieved on 2007-10-03.

Mark Taylor. "The Drivers of Immigration in Contemporary Society: Unequal Distribution of Resources and Opportunities". Human Ecology. 35(6), December, 2007. Available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/3194641502768341/. Accessed December 10, 2009 http://www.cis.org/Kephart/Cecilia-Munoz-Embraces-Amnesty

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Chapter 8 Politics

Chapter 8 Political and Legal Systems

Chapter 8 discusses two types of anthropology political anthropology and legal anthropology. Legal anthropology addresses social order, social conflicts, and how those conflicts are brought to resolution. Political anthropology is the study of power, authority, and influence. The political and legal systems are important part to each culture in the world. Politics is the vehicle by which power, authority and influence are gained. One point that was made by Barbara Miller in the text is that power is the strongest incentive for decision making and probably the least moral. It is not an accident that the world dictators may start out benevolent and end up corrupt or that some congressmen and senators are law abiding citizens when running for office but after election find them in ethical or legal trouble. Absolute power does have a tendency to corrupt. There are four types of political organizations that are responsible for decision making, leadership, maintaining order, protecting group rights, and protecting the society from external threats. The political organizations are:

1. The Band

a) Characterized by informal Leadership

b) Flexibility

c) If a band member has a serious disagreement with another person or spouse he/she leaves the Band and joins another.

2. The Tribe

a) More formal than the Band

b) The Tribe consists of many Bands

c) The Tribe has a headman or head woman leader

d) Big-man/Big-woman political systems exert influence over several different villages.

3. The Chiefdom

a) Include several thousand people

b) Rank is inherited

c) Social division exists, linage and commoners

4. The State

a) Centralized political unit

b) Includes many communities

c) Possesses coercive power

d) Most states are hierarchical and patriarchal

Legal anthropology studies social order and conflict. Recently legal anthropologists have determined that legal institutions often times support and therefore maintain social inequities and injustice. Social control rather than punishment is the main goal of small scale societies. The State on the other hand uses punishments as severe as the death penalty or imprisonment. Interestingly legal anthropologists have determined that high levels of violence in societies are not universal and are associated with the State than with the Band, Tribe, or Chiefdom. Presently cultural anthropologists are attempting to determine a solution to global conflicts by studying peace keeping solutions.

    One of the most interesting items in Chapter 8 was the information given about Hawaii. Hawaii was ruled in 1891 by Queen Lili’uokalani. In an immoral display of power several businessmen both American and European deposed her. Queen Liliuokalani was the last reigning monarch of the Hawaiian Islands. She felt her mission was to preserve the islands for their native residents. In 1898, Hawaii was annexed to the United States and Queen Liliuokalani was forced to give up her throne.

     Queen Liliuokalani was born in Honolulu to high chief Kapaakea and the chiefess Keohokalole, the third of ten children. Her brother was King Kalakaua. Liliuokalani was adopted at birth, at age 4; her adoptive parents enrolled her in the Royal School. There she became fluent in English and influenced by Congregational missionaries. She also became part of the royal circle.
     Upon the death of her brother, King Kalakauam Liliuokalani ascended the throne of Hawaii in January 1891. One of her first acts was to recommend a new Hawaii constitution, as the "Bayonet Constitution" of 1887 limited the power of the monarch and political power of native Hawaiians. This of course was not acceptable to American or European businessmen who had a financial interest in Hawaii they used power, money and influence to put in to place a legal maneuver to oust the rightful ruler the Queen. In 1890, United States used economic tactics to ensure power in the Hawaiian Islands. The McKinley Tariff began to cause a recession in the islands by withdrawing the safeguards ensuring a mainland market for Hawaiian sugar. American interests in Hawaii began to consider annexation for Hawaii to re-establish an economic competitive position for sugar. In 1893, Queen Liliuokalani sought to empower herself and Hawaiians through a new constitution which she herself had drawn up and now desired to proclaim as the new law of the land. It should Queen Liliuokalani's right as a sovereign to issue a new constitution through an edict from the throne. A group led by Sanford B. Dole, the pineapple giant sought to overthrow the institution of the monarchy. The American minister in Hawaii, requested troops to take control of governmental buildings. In 1894, the Queen, was deposed, the monarchy abrogated, and a provisional government was established which later became the Republic of Hawaii. On July 4, 1894, the Republic of Hawaii with Sanford B. Dole as president was proclaimed. It was recognized immediately by the United States government.

Sadly this is a good example of how power and influence can be used not for the good of the people but for financial gain. This leads credence to the statement that power is not necessarily moral.

Work Cited

History of the Hawaiian Kingdom by Norris W. Potter, Lawrence M. Kasdon, ARayson

Kuykendall, R.S. (1967) The Hawaiian Kingdom, 1874–1893. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, p. 474.