Racial Sensitivity in the Times

There was a story recently in the New York Times that talked about the best Christmas gifts for colored people. This story was published for a month before the author of this article came under fire for what she wrote. The African-American author was writing for a particular audience in her article. The criticism stated that the article was "offensive" and "out of touch."

For a world that celebrates diversity I don't see why this article would cause such an uproar. There are certain products geared towards certain races. That doesn't mean the companies are racist. They are just capitalizing on the wants and styles of that race. We don't have a problem that Sean Jean and Fubu have ads that show black people wearing there clothes most of the time. It is the same with Abercrombie and Fitch for white people. To point out that there are gifts that might be more appropriate for a certain race than others isn't racist. Do we really have to watch that closely what we say to not affend every culture, race, religion, and other sensitivities? That would be censorship. It is necessary to watch what we say but sometimes society gets ridiculous with these rules. When it comes to race there will always be a discrepancy between people.

Editors are supposed to choose which stories to publish and this story did pass. There was a reason why this story was published. It might have been to possibly extend its reader diversity or offer more diversity in the paper itself but that really isn't the point here. The editors thought it was appropriate for its audience but you can't make everyone happy. At the end of the day there is plenty more to be worried about in the news than a story about Christmas gifts. We have made plenty of advancements in the equality of everyone which is why a section for black people shouldn't be over analyzed as "offensive." Worrying about stuff like this takes our attention of the big issues right now which are government spending and the welfare of our nation.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1028

Cosmo Magazine

I found this article on Cosmopolitan Magazine and thought it was interesting. I have read Cosmo before, but have never realized just how big of an impact it has made. I have used tricks to make my hair grow longer, different make up methods, and analyzed different types of boys all from the very persuasive pages of this magazine.

In this article it talks about just how much of an impact this magazine has on its audience. Targeted at young women and teenagers, the pages are filled with tips to look sexy and different tips to help the relationship with your man. All girls want to feel sexy, so they take the tips and trades of this influential magazine and incorporate the way they tell you to dress and act into their everyday life. It may not be drastic, but there is still change occurring from this influence. Another main point Cosmo focuses on is attracting boys. Well for the normal girl, this is interesting, because of course they want to attract guys. Certain acts and flirting techniques are discussed and sometimes put into action by the readers to lure in that cute boy.

This magazine shows that not only media through the TV can have such a great impact on the young population, but what they read, see, and act upon can also influence them in big ways.

Check out this article: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2063249/cosmopolitan_magazine_and_gender_stereotypes.html?cat=69

Second Life

I had a class this semester where we used the program Second Life to attend two different classes. This program allowed us to attend class from the comfort of our own rooms in our pajamas. We were still able to see the power points, and actually hear our professor's lecture. Second Life also allowed us to raise our hands and ask questions during the lecture by using a chat bar similar to instant messaging. He also took attendance in these classes. After having these classes I decided to look into it.

Some distance learning courses can be taken solely through second life. Through the Second Life experience, some teachers believe the students will have a sense of community and interaction, creating a virtual college campus. The use of Second Life is becoming more and more popular, and more colleges are creating virtual campuses through this program.

Some other uses for Second Life have been for students to learn other languages. They can attend a class on a certain language, then interact with different people using this particular language such as English or Spanish.

I can't help but think that more and more classes will be held in Second Life, and soon a whole schedule of classes could be held on the virtual Texas A&M campus.

Check out these links: www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/11/13/second.life.../index.html

http://secondlifegrid.net/slfe/education-use-virtual-world

Relationships Through the Book

The media is popping out new things here and there, changing how we communicate with one another and how we live out basic daily duties. Facebook is a fairly new technology that has society connecting many of its routines and fundamentals. It also has a major way on how we interact together and how we form relationships. Compared to past forms of social media, Facebook allows you to connect with people from all around the world; those from your past and random acquaintances. It affects our social, work and romantic relationships. My presentation discussed examples in all these categories. While it has down falls, the expanding number of members shows the benefits are worth the risks.
Facebook has become some popular mainly due to the fact that is accesiable and convenient. It is also less taxing than direct communication. It allows being members to consume new content and stay in touch with new content being shared. It is very audience generated, allowing you to post and create whatever you would like for your page.
While Facebook is helpful in maintaining friendships, it also is a misrepresentation of our social network in that they most people only stay in contact with a small group of friends. So while Facebook keeps us connected to people from all over the world, in reality we only communicate with those we are already tightly connected to. But the point of this is that while not all friends are close, it does explain why things spread so quickly on Facebook. And while most people that you call your “friends” in reality they are most likely people you met randomly through out sometime in your like. So while your friendships with other members of Facebook might not be “personal,” they are “social” and keep you connected with one another. This can be important when dealing with the work field, because we can think of these friends as “alliances” that can lead to new opportunities. A quick introduction could lead to a friendship that could last years if one was willing to place time through communicating with them on Facebook. Businesses also use Facebook to survey members and develop new marketing patterns to gain more consumers’ attention. The last type of relationship that can be interpreted with in Facebook, is the romantic one. Most people have heard the saying, “It’s not official till it’s on Facebook” and with the video I showed, it proved that Facebook is important when developing a new romance. Studies have also show that Facebook can lead to more jealousy toward romantic partners, which in turns leads to even more time on Facebook. People are exposed to more information of their partners when involved on Facebook, leading to trust problems and other troubles.
Facebook has offered plenty of new advances in the way we interact with the world. It opens up all new doors and continues to change the way we network and communicate. I asked what students what they think Facebook will be like in two years and many of them expressed that they believe it will continue to grow and become more advanced, allowing for more business applications to be used. Some voiced that they do not believe that it will be extremely prominent in the business work-field and that email will be the main source of via communication. But the easiness and accessabiility of Facebook will obviously lead to many new advances in New Media and how relationships with others are form.

Comcast Buys NBC

I found this article at Wired.com that was recently posted, Comcast Buys NBC, Clouding Online TV’s Future. This merger raises an interesting point. In this class, we have discussed the idea of "Who Controls the Network?" In this merger of these two very large and influential companies in the media business, we are seeing the integration of a company that creates content and one that gives access to content. By combining these two companies, both net neutrality (by a company that already has had its hand slapped by the FCC for its dubious throttling practices) and free speech are threatened. If this deal goes through, it may be argued that Comcast/NBC will control the network. In the article, it describes a scenario where tv shows posted online created by NBC might only be accessible through a Comcast connection. This is only one of many possible dire outcomes of such a substantial merging of a content provider and service provider.

Facebook as a New Media Frontier

This past Tuesday, I presented my Case Study about New Media. I primarily focused on the different aspects of Facebook and how it is slowly becoming a frontier for New Media. With the many attractive features that this social networking site has available to its account holders, it is no wonder how Facebook is becoming a phenomenon across the entire globe. However, with the growing features of Facebook comes a price that many consumers are not fully aware of. Users must take caution in what they put up on their personal web pages as well as be wary of any applications they decide to add.

During my presentation, I explained what we consider to be “New” Media in the eyes of the consumers. I explained that New Media has six different categories that it can belong to, including: Digital, Interactivity, Audience Generated, Asynchronous Communication, Narrowcasting, and Multimedia forms. Upon closer examination of each of these categories, it is easy to see how the world of Facebook is quickly expanding into the realm of New Media. Facebook can be considered part of practically all of these categories. So, when presented with the question, “What is “new” about “New Media”, we can see that Facebook is the unification of all six categories. The world of Facebook is entirely digital, as it is only accessible through a computer. It is interactive, seeing as how many of the applications that the users are allowed to add are various mini-games that they can play during their spare time. It is also almost completely audience generated, seeing as how each user has their own unique personal web page. Users can choose to view the website at any time they please, making it a good example of Asynchronous communication. Facebook also has narrowed their advertisements to specifically cater to each unique user, thus making it a viable example of narrowcasting. Finally, Facebook provides links to other sorts of websites through their advertisements that pertain to whatever each unique user is interested, a trait that multimedia forms is known for. When I asked the class how Facebook could expand in terms of New Media, I suggested that it could also integrate parts of “old” media, such as television and music. Creating an application wouldn’t be very hard to include television websites such as Hulu as well as music websites such as Last.fm.

With the addition of these two media outlets, Facebook could potentially become the milestone of the past 10 years in media mediums. Not only would it include every single aspect of “New Media”, but it could also incorporate the aspects of “Old Media” in order to revolutionize the way the modern world works. Facebook is truly changing the way everyone lives their lives, creating virtual relationships and virtual friendships.

On Thursday, I presented a case study on standardization in mobile technology in the United States and Europe/Asia. In the United States, the FCC decided not to set a mobile technology standard, instead deciding to allow for competition, industry, and the free market to decide its own standard. They believed that the competition would drive innovation in the field. Instead, three incompatible technologies emerged that has prevented the United States from progressing as quickly as other countries. In Europe/Asia, they adopted a single standard. Using this one standard has allowed them to update their systems more efficiently, quickly, and cheaply than the United States.

In my case study, I examined the question: what social and economic forces influence communication infrastructure? I would argue that various cultural influences in the countries in question resulted in their current mobile technology infrastructure. In the United States, there is a fear of big government and over-regulation/interference, tradition of isolationism, ultimate belief in the free market’s superiority, and an individualistic culture. These views may have lead the United States to decide against a standard. In Europe/Asia, there is a tradition of compromise, standardization, and corroboration across countries. For example, they have worked together on public transportation, transportation across borders, standardization of the Euro, etc. Also, many of these countries have in the past (and, in some cases, present) had collectivistic cultures or governments. These views and past collaborations may have allowed for such standardization across so many countries.

During discussion, I asked whether government setting a standard or letting the free market determine its own standards was better. Several students seemed to think that setting a standard sounded like it would allow for quicker innovation. I would have to agree. Looking at Europe as an example, it seems to have allowed them to update quickly enough to be several years ahead of us in mobile technology. Also, I asked whether quick and compatible innovation/upgrading or the preservation of the free market and business with less regulation in mobile industries was more important. One opinion expressed was that the preservation of the free market was more important in this instance than the compatible technologies. I can understand this point of view, because the government getting too involved in industry can definitely lead to mishaps. However, I believe that in the instance of fundamental communication infrastructure, standardization is a necessary evil. In some ways, by choosing a standard, we are giving up some possibilities that other standards could have offered. However, this opportunity cost seems less than the cost of not setting a standard which leads to slow innovation/upgrading, incompatibilities, and increased set up/upgrading costs.

Technology annd Social interaction in the classroom

For the topic of the communication infrastructure, I focused on technology in the classroom. From advancing technology from the computer we are able to do more in the classroom today. Specifically, I focused on three different topics during my presentation: distance learning, internet applications, and technology geared classes. In addition to the advancements of the computer, the internet has given us many more resources to enhance the learning process. Such websites are WebCT, Course Compass, Facebook, and so many more. I am a TA and I used Facebook to communicate with my students about assignments and class activities. The internet has also made communicating much easier through instant messaging and social networking sites.
Distance Learning is more convenient now than ever. Through instant messaging and streaming video online classes are virtually comparable to being in the classroom. I focused on instant messaging mainly because 85% of adolescents use it. It is also a direct line from the professor to the student. Communication is not an issue because of this. E-mail is always an alternative to that as well. Internet application have allowed teachers and students to retrieve information online, look up grades, and find other important school related material. I used Elearning as my example here because it allows the student to look up notes, instant message to other people in the class, and find other resources the professor posted that we might need for the class. Finally, I discussed how there are more programs to help grade school students get familiar with technology. This adds stress to the students because the internet has opened more resources but it is for the better.
I concluded that students are more prepared for their next step in life from the technology training they receive in school. During my discussion, Twitter was brought up as an internet tool for Communication 325. It wasn’t the most preferred resource for class work but it is breaking barriers with technology in the classroom. The online math homework website was discussed as being an obstacle to overcome. Along with the talk about Twitter I said it was hard for me to get used to it, and I still don’t like it that much. Lastly, it was brought up that someone’s younger brother was using computer notebooks in middle school. This tied into my conclusion since children of all ages are learning about computers and their applications at younger ages. The preparation is needed for the technology laden world they will be moving onto later on in life.

Case Study: Net Neutrality in Canada

Last thursday I presented a case study that had to do with net neutrality in Canada. Net neutrality in todays world is a big issue, that the government is starting to notice. Net neutrality in Canada allows people to view any websites at any bandwidth equally. The students in the class payed great attention because it is an issue that is spreading throughout the world that is very imporntant, because it can be the end of a free internet.

When I started my presentation I asked the question who uses the internet? And the answer is everybody that has access to the internet uses it. Now why use the internet? People in these days use it for mostly everything: shopping, watch television, play games, pay bills, watch the new, research? In 1991 the internet was commercial used for the first time by Tim Berners-Lee and he invented the internet so people can use it freely. Now imagine that the network providers that you pay every month for good banwidth control what websites you can view on how much you pay. For example, if you want your computer to browse faster than usual, you will have to pay an extra fee; also if you want to research something on google you have to pay another in orther to research. That is why the government in Canada is taking control and putting net neutraility in act. They enacted Bill-C552 (net neutrality).It allows people with internet access browse the web free not paying for what you what to see and how fast you want your computer to browse. Also, the government made it illegal for network providers to do bandwidth throttling. Network providers try to control internet traffic and make people internet very slow so that they will use their service. So who controls the network? Well I would have to say both the network providers and the government. The government is controlling the network because they are letting people in Canada surf the web freely, not having to pay on what sites they want to view and browse. But in the other hand the network providers are controlling the netwoprk because they have control on what can content can be viewed, just no fee to do, which is what they are trying to do. This can be a big crisis in the world if network provider can have full control of the internet. It can be the end of the internet, which is not a good thing, because in todays world the internet is what society rely on to do everything. There is a website that supports net neutrality it would be a good thing that people go on and support it so that the internet can be used freely. Also a video explaining Canada's internet.




http://www.savetheinternet.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfHjP0jRf4s

Net Neutrality and the Internet Freedom Act of 2009

This past Thursday I presented a case study to the class on Net Neutrality and the Internet Freedom Act of 2009. Net Neutrality is the principle that “if a given user pays for a certain level of Internet access, and another user pays for a given level of access, that the two users should be able to connect to each other at the subscribed level of access.” Right now the FCC is for Net Neutrality. A few years ago the FCC caught Comcast, the 2^nd largest US cable television and Internet communications provider, throttling customer’s Internet connection. The Internet Freedom Act, proposed by Senator John McCain, states that the Internet should be “free from government control and regulation.” If that act passes, Internet providers such as Comcast could start doing whatever they wanted to. This chart could very well be our future:

Whenever I presented this in class, I was not surprised at how unenthusiastic the class was. There are a lot of possible factors: 1) it was 8:00AM 2) they just heard about net neutrality 5 minutes ago 3) I’m not the best speaker. I can keep making excuses but I honestly think that our generation does not care (or at least non-computer science majors). This generation is spoiled rotten. You all expect everything to work and for everything to be handed to you, especially the Internet. Like Andrew mentioned in his blog post, our society relies heavily on the Internet for daily use. You use it for just about everything. In this era of media convergence, most of us get our news and weather online. We watch television shows online on Hulu. We watch movies online through Netflix. We can call people with our computers using Skype. We listen to music online through Pandora. The Internet has basically replaced the radio, the telephone, the television, and the newspaper. That’s a good thing, right? Not if you’re one of the big cable television and Internet communications providers. They noticed that people are now using the Internet for these things, and they’re not making money from it. They’re losing money. Why pay for cable when you can watch your favorite TV shows online? The only way they can possibly make any money from this is by charging extra for what you use the Internet for. High-bandwidth services (like Skype, Hulu, Netflix, etc.) will not be included with your access to the Internet. Instead, you have to pay extra to access these features. That would be totally legal if the Internet Freedom Act of 2009 passes. Without any regulation, companies can do what they please, and they’ll do whatever makes them money. Instead of innovating technologies, they want to provide us the technology that’s been around for years and charge extra for it. Without any other competition, if one or two companies start charging extra, others will follow, leaving you with one or no other alternatives. In response to the question “Who controls or monitors the media?” I would have to say that the people control the media. YOU have the power to decide whether or not the act passes. If you go to http://www.savetheinternet.com you can sign the online petition. Whether you are for against net neutrality, go to the website and find out how you can contact your local representative. Tell them how you feel about net neutrality.

Here’s a video on net neutrality, in case you haven’t gotten the concept down:

Case Study: American Idol

Last Thursday, I presented a case study to the class on American Idol, one of the most watched TV programs in America. Today, almost everyone knows about American Idol. Many students in class were surprised about my presentation. I was happy that most students took my presentation seriously and some students gave their personal opinions during discussion time.

I started my presentation about why TV is interactive and gave a clear definition of interactive TV which is the various ways which allow viewers to interact with TV content as they view it. Then I discussed in detail about the history and operation of American Idol. I also discussed about how American Idol’s interactivity allows audience and viewer participation in the form of dialing toll free numbers or text messaging. I also discussed that American Idol also promotes its idol merchandise such as single song releases, albums, posters, DVDs, books, t-shirts, temporary tattoos, key chains, and a CD-Rom computer game, during TV shows which led to the development of new media markets. In response to the topic question “How do older media form influence new media markets?” My answer would be older media form such as TV allows shows such as American Idol to gain worldwide attention and attraction of the public and media. American Idol uses this opportunity to promote various products which are purchased by the public, contributing to an increasing media market. There were two other case studies presented on the same day which discusses about the TV digital converter box and a free online TV website “Hulu” which also caught my attention.

Hulu as a New Media Market

Last week in class I presented a case study to the class over the online streaming video provider Hulu. Old media is able to inform new media markets through convergence. The television media market has converged with internet technology to create a new media market where television programming can be viewed on sites like Hulu for free. Providers of the standard home subscription based cable plan are forced to compete in this new market despite numerous limitations. The only real advantage they have is the ability to offer premium content and programming which a free service like Hulu cannot provide.

I gave a brief introduction on what media convergence is and how it has affected the television media market in the past. I then discussed some of the emerging trends that have lead television into the online television media market. These reasons included the growth of online videos being watched, the bad economy, and the effects of DVR commercial skipping on revenue obtained by advertisers. I then discussed how the Hulu site addresses these concerns. After that I discussed how cable television providers are attempting to compete with the Hulu service through their own new online television content service.

For the class discussion I first tried to get an idea of how many classmates actually prefer to watch television online. I was surprised to find that very few actually prefer this method. Most students either watched television content live or used DVR equipment to record shows for later viewing. On top of this nobody seemed to believe that a service like Hulu could ever replace cable television. Many believed that premium content and sports channels would prevent Hulu from ever being able to replace cable television. It would seem that the new media market of online television has a lot of growing left to do before it can fully replace the old market of cable television.

The Digital Converter

On November 05, 2009 I presented a case study on the digital converter box. In June 2009, the United States Government along with the FCC and NTIA, switched from analog to digital television. Although told for many months, many people lost connection to their televisions. Their antennas no longer received digital transmissions. The digital converter box was the only object that could receive and process the new digital airwaves. The process from analog to digital shows how old media affects new media.

At the beginning of my presentation, I gave a brief overview of the history of television. The first broadcast was in 1925 while the first regular broadcast in the United States was in 1936. I next gave defined The Freeze which lasted from 1948 to 1952 and the Golden Age which lasted from the late ‘40s to the early ‘50s.

Next, I moved to the digital transformation, more importantly the beginning of the digital converter box. The federal government spent over $2.5 billion by handing out a maximum of two coupons per household. The NTIA and FCC combined forces to tackle this large feat, but now the NTIA no longer has anything to do with the converter boxes. The coupon was for $40 off of a new converter box. New converter boxes range in price from $40-$90. I found a quote which I had been missing reading for the past two weeks, due to the fact that the article I was looking at mainly talked about how much money it would cost for the coupon. This quote, “No widespread disruption of free, over-the-air television broadcasts, “(Cable) is meant to describe the transfer from analog to digital television. The transfer was not exactly smooth or disruption free. Many people had problems with the antennas, as many did not have the converter yet. The only people that saw no change were the ones with cable or satellite. If you had cable or satellite you did not have to buy a converter box.

Another point that I made was that only four channels out of seventeen were set aside for police, fire, and rescue organizations. The remaining thirteen were auctioned off. Verizon Wireless and AT&T spent a combine $16 billion in hopes of improving their own broadband services.

In conclusion, I would like to leave you with a few questions.

Did the digital converter box offer better reception and better quality?
Was there an increase in channels?
What types of conspiracies started due to the federal government giving no real reason why they wanted everyone to go digital?

"How Do Film Industries Influence Women's Perception of Body Image"

In my case study, "How Do Film Industries Influence Women's Perception of Body Image", we discussed that the film industry has become one of the most powerful influences on women and their perception of sefl-image. Over time, from the Victorian Era of the 1800s to the present, media has begun to set an unrealistic standard for the "ideal" body of women.
Body image is a term that relates to an individual's internal perception, evaluation, and thoughts about one's person appearance. With the ever growing film industry women are constantly finding themselves conforming to the molds that are illustrated in the Hollywood sphere. Media has formed a habit of only casting one type of woman for their leading roles, neglecting to inform the audience of the digital or surgical alterations, airbrushing, or other editing effects. Women are increasingly objectified to unnatural expectations od beauty that are put forward by models and actresses who do not reflect the average appearance of women in society.
The "ideal" body of women has changed profoundly, but it seems to be a continuous vicious cycle to follow. During the Victorian Era of the 1800s, women's ideal body type was plump and full-figured; women accentuated their hips and buttocks with restricting corsets. At the start of the 19th century, slenderness was more fashionable. The 1920s gave way to the slim flapper who bound their curves to achieve a washboard look. Energy and viltality became central and body fat was a sign of self-indulgence. In the 1930s the film industry had begun to produce the first movie stars and it was referred to as the "age of glamour". A tall slender figure was the most sought after. Marilyn Monroe set the standard for the 1950s and even into the 1960s. Acceptance of the voluptuous woman, and the need to build back the curves that defined a women was imperative. The 1960s saw a split between the supermodels and the movie stars. The models were leaning towards one end of the body mass index with the "thin is in" look while the actresses were still illustrating the classical womanly figure. From the 1980s to the present, being ultra thin is the look women are trying to obtain. More recently, the thin has become thinner, and the ability of most women to achieve this look is near impossible.
Mass culture and the media serve to project the body ideal and turn gentle concern into obsession. The media has given us very rigid, uniform beauty ideals. TV, magazines, and movies mean we see beautiful people more often then our friends and family; the ideal becomes more familiar to us and thus appears more normal and attainable. The movie industries reinforce the importance of a thin body as a measure of a women's worth.

Children's Movies and Aggressive Behavior

In my case study, “Children’s Movies and Aggressive Behavior”, I discussed the effects of the film industry on young children. This idea is taken from the Cultivation Theory. This theory states that what we see and hear through different media is responsible for shaping our conceptions of reality. Heavy viewers, or those who watch a lot of film or other media, will tend to see reality in a way that is portrayed by the media. For instance, if someone watches an abundance of violent media, they tend to view reality as a violent place where no one can be trusted and crime is right outside their door.

So in essence, those who watch more movies and TV have a harder time separating reality and what they see on screen. Their reality has more similarities to onscreen productions then to actual life.

I discussed two different studies that were done in reference to media influence on children’s aggression. The first one was conducted in the 1930s. Herbert Blumer’s studies found that media did have an effect on kids. He called this effect emotional possession. Emotional Possession is the idea that viewers identify with the characters and situations on screen. Children, or adults for that matter, can lose ordinary self control as unleashed feelings gain expression (seeing them on film). For some viewers, the behaviors associated with emotional possession become entrenched and leads to long lasting behavioral effects. The next study I covered was the Bobo doll experiment. Albert Bandura conducted this in 1961. Smaller groups taken from 36 girls and 36 boys of ages 3 to 6 were exposed to violent action or aggressive behavior then sent to play with toys such as the Bobo doll. Other smaller groups were not exposed to violent acts at all. The groups of kids that were exposed to these violent acts displayed more violence when playing with the toys afterward. This study proved that children are very likely to replicate the actions of role models.

In the presentation I explained a few reasons why children were so drawn to this violent behavior from movies. Filmmakers stylize violence and heighten its emotional impact by using stimulating music, recognizable actors and effects. Violence has also now become a movie norm. In children’s movies those who endure the violence are relatively free of suffering. Justifiable aggression is one of the last reasons and I demonstrated this with the clip from Beauty and the Beast. The Beast used violence and won the girl in the end, therefore justifiable. Kids watch movies and idolize those characters they see in them, because being so young, what they see in movies is a big part of their everyday lives, so it only makes sense that these characters that display aggressive behavior become child heroes. These characters are so attractive because they are displayed as the good guys. They fight with a purpose and always get the girl and are rewarded. Many times they are the hero in the story and are shown in a very positive light by filmmakers.

During the discussion at the end we focused on the main question of this class, who controls/monitors the media? We decided that violence is usually overlooked in children’s media because there is usually a bigger part of the story that is focused on. We also talked about the control that parents have over what their children watch, but we decided that at one time or another, kids will be exposed to some kind of violence. Some examples I shared in class were Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean, Pocahontas, and Beauty and the Beast.

· Some other links you could check out are: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4586465813762682933#docid=7341218559556376241