The media and the marketplace have had the best of times and the worst of times to be cliche. I agree with the idea that consumers are buying the ideas and products that the marketplace produces. However, I wonder if the viewer was well educated on what they needed if they would still buy all the crap that is advertised.
In the US the media structure is set up in such a way that media is dependent on the market place and pretty much vice verse. The Media would have trouble surviving with out the money from advertisers and I doubt many products would be as successful with out the advertising they receive. It seems to be a vicious circle that continues to cycle.

Marketplace and the public

I feel like there is a love/hate relationship between the marketplace and the public. We continually criticize the marketplace about what they present to the public, but isn't it the public that just eats this stuff up? The marketplace continues to function and work the way it does because "they" profit off of our viewership, readership, etc. We will always hope that our marketplace of information will present truthful, unbiased content, but unless the consumers/public stop participating in it they're still working hand in hand with the marketplace they claim to disapprove of. The public disapproves of the fact that everything is biased and censored, but at the same time the public continues to read, watch and listen to that very same censorship that is given to them by the marketplace. It's frustrating that this issue can go on forever because it seems like the relationship between the two will never go away or be solved.

Media Literacy

For myself, I never thought my media literacy education was anything unusual. Ever since about 7th grade I was in some sort of class, or one of my classes spent a whole few weeks every semester talking about the media and how to consume it. Throughout High School I had different types of classes such as Contemporary Issues or World of Ideas, or an entire Media Class in which we just studied the different types of media out there. However, discussions in this Capstone class have let me realize that not everyone in this country have the same opportunity. For me, it is nothing special to think, "What is this commercial after?" or "What is this story really trying to say?" I do not know really who should be responsible for this type of education. IF schools were capable of doing it I would put it on them, but budgets and whatnot do not realistically allow for every school to include these special kinds of electives. I think society in general should try to educate itself when it can about Media Literacy.

Conflict between the marketplace and the public

I think there has always been conflict between the marketplace and the needs of the public. First of all there are the stereotypes of each marketplace, like Fox is the conservative network and CNN is the more liberal network. With these images I think the marketplace is always trying to please the public, but yet the public is never pleased. Either way they think a network is too liberal or conservative. The marketplace is always trying to make things better according to what the public wants and needs. I honestly think no matter what the marketplace does, the public will never be happy with it and that the two will never really meet a happy medium. Like Graham said, I don't have much knowledge in either subject.

the marketplace and the public

I think that the marketplace and the needs of the public has always had a very akward relationship, due to the fact both sides have different beliefs of what they actually need and want. the public is always wanting something for the best price, deal, or other contractional obligation while the market place needs to make the most profit that it can for the service that it has to offer. I feel it is very hard for both the market place and the needs of the public to reach a resolution in most of the affairs that they encounter together. Sometimes the needs of the public cause a greater strain of problems with the marketplace in general. I feel that i don't have a great amount of knowledge on how these two groups interact, but through their interaction and using the media to show that interaction it will help me understand how the public needs and the pressures of the marketplace will always share a common ground.

Media Literacy

My media literacy began at a very early age. My parents have always been aware of what is going on in the news and with the media. They have always told me to be leery of what I was seeing on television because it may be an exaggeration of the truth, and I have seen that all the more as I have grown older and found these things on my own. My parents are definitely conservative so we were mainly watching Fox News instead of CNN, and that has carried into my life. That is what I watch because I think it is what I was taught and that is what I learned.
I did not have anything in school to teach me about the media. It was all in the home.

Media Literacy

Like most everyone else in my group, my media literacy experience started in college. I watched news sometimes but never with any regularity. The only time I picked up a newspaper was to do the crossword. In my Film Studies degree, I learned to pick apart the visual media - form and content. One class that made me look at a lot of things I had never thought about was Race, Gender, and Media. For instance, I never really looked at ethnic representation in television.
I had never thought about why who sends us what messages was important. I started getting skeptical about what information was being left out of stories in my newscast. I still don't watch much news but I read plenty of news online from a variety of sources. I feel better about how and what I watch now, that's for sure.

Media Literacy

I think I have been more exposed to the media being in college than I did when I was in high school. Growing up the only time I watched the news was with my dad or at the gym because that was the only thing on the television, and being a high school student I got bored easily and didn't care much. My school never exposed us to the media, but we did have a media class where we shot and edited our own packages and then put them in our own television show. That was about as far as my media exposure went. In college I have come to care more about what is going on, so I will turn on the news when I get home at night or open up the paper in the mornings. Last summer I interned at Dateline NBC and in every hall they were playing MSNBC on the television. I really enjoyed getting to see news coverage all day long and this really exposed me to what was going on in the world. I think as we get older, we mature and actually care more about being exposed.

I agree with Graham and I also believe that my media literacy began in college. I have always been the type of person who has vocally expressed their own thoughts and ideas. However, I think that I was unaware of so many ideas dealing with critical thinking and media literacy before college. My media literacy began like many others in English composition and analyzing advertisements. I had always thought that advertisements often exploited women, but I was unaware to what degree. It was in this class that I noticed that these ads dehumanized women exposing only portions of their body and rarely their face. While in this class I realized the media through advertisements reinforces the United State's patriarchal gender roles. Demonstrating the idea that women should only look good and don't have much to say. My media literacy grew when I took a trip with the journalism college to view media abroad. This expanded my mind and helped me to view the media in the United States through the eyes of other countries. That experience has made me a critical consumer of American media. My media literacy has also expanded through my knowledge of technology and equipment. Since I now know how to film and edit different materials I understand the techniques used to relay the message to the audience. I now watch reality television and understand that it cannot be completely real because of the different angles the camera used in a particular sequence. Media literacy is a power tool to posses. But the scary thing is people don't realize how powerful this tool is until they are in possession of it.

Media Exposure

When I was in junior high and high school I did not follow the news. I never read the newspaper and when my parents watched the news on TV I would leave the room. The only time I was ever exposed to "news" was for about 20 minutes during school. Channel One was my schools attempt to teach us current events. Some teachers actually made us watch it, while other teachers didn't care if we watched it or not. The one time I can really think of news infiltrating into the school system was when 9/11 occurred. We did nothing but watch the news and listen to the radio that day. Every now and then I would get into conversations with friends at school who actually followed the news. I agree with Graham when I say that keeping up with the news and current events was not something that was implemented in my schooling.Since I've come to college I've tried to at least catch a newscast before the day is over, because professors in college incorporate current issues and news more than teachers did in high school with their discussions and teachings. I feel more compelled to keep up with what's going on because I like to be able to follow along in lecture, that and the fact that I think it's simply a part of growing up.

Media Literacy

I think that i've aqcuired my sense of media literacy more in college than in all of my previous education. To me, high school was just more of a time of getting the basic education of reading, writing, history, and math; it was not a time when we focused on how the media influenced our daily lives. It seems that the media itself shapes our own media literacy. They provide us with a mold of their own to get the people to think a certain way. Once in college i realized more and more that you cannot always trust the media for what it says to be true. Often their are political beliefs about what we see and do not see in the media (including magazines, television, and newspapers). To understand media to it's fullest is a very tough task. If i really want to find a message in the media i have to sometimes view the media over and over again. Also, media is always changing and therefore understanding it will always be a constant process

Indigenous Lecture with Salazar

I attended the Thursday morning lecture on Ethnic Citizenship and Social Media in an age of shifting identities. The title of the lecture was the my main interest in this particular lecture, however I was highly disappointed in the overall presentation of the lecture. For starters outside of the room in which the lecture was held massive construction was taking place making it difficult to hear the speaker. After the construction quieted I was able to listen to the rest of the lecture. I assumed that Juan F. Salazar would be lecturing on actual media occurrences in indigenous countries. This was hardly the case. Salazar spent most of the time giving facts about the indigenous people of Chile. Salazar who is an anthropologist made a documentary style video that involved indigenous people living in Chile. He did not speak about the film revealing its findings or even why he made it. The main point Salazar repeated was many who had viewed the video thought it was shot by the indigenous people. At the end of Salazar's lecture someone asked what exactly his claim was and Salazar stated, 'I do not really have a claim.' The lecture was alright but I wish he had given more information on how media was changing the indigenous people or how they were changing the media.

On Thursday, I attended the symposium at the Union. I found this talk very interesting. I think it is important to approach the subject of stereotypes and how Americans view nationalities. I think she made a good point about these stereotypes and their effects and I like how some are using the media now to speak out on their voice. I do know however, that I did lose some of what she was saying because I couldn't hear everything quiet so well. However, I did find the symposium interesting and I was glad I attended.

"Out of Place: rom Exile to Flexible Citizenship"

I also attended "Out of Place: From Exile to Flexible Citizenship" by Maria Gabriela Nouzeilles. Ms. Nouzeilles was extremely hard to understand because of her heavy accent, lack of amplification, and the fact that she was speed reading to us off of her essay. The first part of her "presentation" was about the process of becoming invisible. As an immigrant, do you stay true to your country or American-ize to decrease the level of attention you draw to yourself?

The second part was about a new type of traveler, the cosmopolitan traveler, and transmigrants who can enjoy the pleasures of flexible citizenship. Transmigrats are able to create allegiances with more than one country while cosmopolitan travelers are more of a "postmodern tourist."

She claims that visual media reinforces the idea of transnationalities. How? I couldn't understand her arguement. But she did note that exiles should pay attention to how the media portrays them because we tend to alienate ethnic minorities.

Then Ms. Nouzeilles showed two clips from a Brazilian video artist Sandra Kogut. The first was a little too experimental for me, so I didn't really get the point of "Parabolic People." The second was very interesting though, "The Hungarian Passport," which was about her struggle to claim her Jewish heritage through her Hungarian grandparents who were displaced during the war.

"Out of Place: From Exile to Flexible Citizenship"

I attended "Out of Place: From Exile to Flexible Citizenship" presented by Maria Gabriela Nouzeilles. After sitting through it, I wished I had been able to listen to a different one. For the majority of her presentation I could not understand a word she was saying. I personally didn't find her to be a good presenter. I kept having to ask the people next to me what she was saying and talking about. Her presentation was about her perspective on the diversity of citizenship in Latin America. One point I was able to grasp was that she presented the fact that issues like satellite communications, the internet, global markets and travel have made our world into a global society. She continued to say that conflicts are created through the world as a consequence of globalization’s threat to the identity of longstanding cultures. In conclusion to her presentation she showed us a brief video of an old woman from a particular latin culture traveling on a train through different country. The train employee gave her a hard time with her passport and identification because she was not from there. Nouzeilles mentioned that these cultural divisions and the world's globalization issues are coming out and being presented through the media.

And that's all I could make out through the entire hour.

The New Media

On Thursday I attended the Symposium in the Union. It was a little difficult at first to grasp her original argument because she was simply reading from an essay and not exactly speaking. I found it to be really interesting to hear her perspective and the view of foreign people. She talked about the stereotypes and how those were now being brought out in the media and now those people who were originally quiet are now grabbing their voice through the media. I thought it was hard to grasp her argument but I think that it eventually came out in the end.
I also thought the clips from the movies that she is associated with was a great touch. After she explained what the videos stood for, I began to fully grasp what she was saying.

Ethnic Citizenship and Social Media

On Thursday at 9 a.m. I attended the symposium Ethnic Citizenship and Social Media in an Age of Shifting Identities by Juan Salazar. With all the noise from the construction going on in the Union it was a little hard to hear but this is what I got from his presentation. Salazar is a professor in Sidney, Australia but is from Chile. He never really stated an argument in his presentation but he talked about the media on the indigenous people of Chile. There were many indigenous social movements with the latest in the 1990s which was an emergence of an indigenous movement with different features in a context of globalization, neoliberalism, democratization, and multiculturalism of Latin America nation-states. The media for the indigenous people is called the Mapuche which deals with the concerns of the Mapuche people from Chile and parts of Argentina. Some aspects of it are the urbanization with the mass migration from rural to urban parts and the indigenous leadership in the urban areas. To show the new influence of the Mapuche, Salazar made a documentary, De la Tierra a la Pantalla. While making this documentary Salazar stopped reading the Chilean press and only read the Mapuche press for four years to learn more about them. He said it was amazing to read about his country in a different way and to see the different outlook. But when showing his documentary to the indigenous people they are shocked that a white man made that movie because it shows their ways so well. He played a little from his film but had it on mute. The documentary really helped people understand the Mapuche and also showing how any certain type of media can influence your beliefs. All people are believe different things so its great for others to voice what they believe. Now about 500 media organizations are run by indigenous people.

The new media

On Thursday morning I attended the symposium on Ethnic media in Latin American countries. The presentation was held by Juan F. Salazar (originally from Chile) who is a professor in Sydney, Australia. He didn't really seem to hold an argument but rather an enlightenment on how the indigenous people of Chile (the non-white Latin Americans) have begun to grab a voice in media. The leading media for indigenous people in this country is called " Mapuche". The Mapuche Press is an alternative voice that can be heard on the Internet, but it is mainly for the indigenous Mapuche people who live in Chile and Argentina. The Mapuche media deals with the concerns of the Mapuche people. (e.g. how they deal with the urbanization of their culture into the mainstream world, or how they deal with environmental issues). What Salazar did to show the new influence of the Mapuche was filming a documentary about the people. First off, Salazar stopped reading the common Chilean Press for four straight years. He only looked at Mapuche media to try and understand them. By doing this, Salazar said he was able to a whole new perspective of his country through the eyes of an Alternative media source. His film was a documentary that has gone on to several film festivals. The Mapuche people who have seen his film were surprised to find out that he is a "white Latin American" and not really an "indigenous" person of the country. This shows the influence of Mapuche and how the media can shape our views based on how we read it and let it into our lives