#7: Comments
Thursday, September 9, 2010 at 1:05 AM
Can it be? Can it really be?!
After many grueling decades, and countless tears...oh, but it's true!!
posted by Rowena @ 1:05 AM 0 Comments
After many grueling decades, and countless tears...oh, but it's true!!
I am actually finished!
Hurrah! Joy to the world!
Edit: Ah, in all my happiness, I have completely forgotten to post the links to my comments. Voici:
#1: Dianne Entereso & "Google Street View"
#2: Robert Ramassar & "Ads From the Past"
#3: Daniel Djayakarsana & "Unilever, Hypocryte Much?"
#4: Victor Copetti & "Video Games: The Good, The bad, and the Ugly"
#5: Fionna Chui & "Photo Manipulation"
#6: Sarah Brown & "Re: Is Taxing pop Really a Solution?"
(I am now sobbing tears of joy).
...this was quite an enjoyable unit actually, now that I think about it.
posted by Rowena @ 1:05 AM 0 Comments
#6: Is Taxing Pop Really a Solution?
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 at 11:31 PM
Over the course of the last few years - we have seen a new initiative coming from many different sources - where their goal is to get everyone healthy. We have seen it in movies, like Super Size Me - where the main character sets out to eat nothing but McDonalds for a whole month. Of course in the end there were many healthy repercussions from doing this and it probably turned many people off from eating at McDonald's ever again. From there - we see a lot of these fast food chains start to introduce healthy menu choices - like salads and apples and oranges instead of french fries. Now don't get me wrong - all of these are good steps towards becoming a healthier nation - but is it enough?Then we started to see this initiative coming through in the schools. Elementary schools starting instituting a regular physical activity time and in the high schools they stopped stocking pops and chips and candies in all but one place in the school. In the United States some schools don't even have vending machines. Even this year our own cafeteria has started to cook in a healthier way as they have a mandate to meet that was set out by our school board. And have you noticed the vending machine on the first floor - most of the chocolate bars and chips have been replaced with granola bars and crackers.Recently a news segment on the radio reported how the state of New York wants to impose a new tax on pop. Their reason - pop is extremely unhealthy and causes so many health issues that eventually result in high health care costs.Now although this tax isn't for sure, in the meantime - the New York Health Department has started a campaign against pop. They even produced a video that has many people turning away in disgust.Is this kind of scare campaign effective? Does it make you want to become a healthier person? Do you think that the growing obesity in our nation is an epidemic of large proportions? Tell us how you responded to the video above? If the new tax goes through in America - what's to say that it won't happen here? If it does - would you continue to pay a large sum of money for something like pop or chips?
Fear. It's a survival mechanism that allows us to be more aware of a coming threat or danger. It is a great emotion that has an enormous impact on our lives. Because of this, businesses have now started to play on our fears as an advertising tactic, and though, in a way, it is quite manipulative, it is definitely effective in getting a message across. Take a look at this advertisement, for example:
 |
| (Source: http://www.naturalnews.com/019915.html) |
Now, although this advertisement didn't scare me to the point that I never want to go out in the sun ever again, it did scare me to the point that I realized I need to take care of my skin when I go out in the sun (i.e., putting on sunscreen)...and that is the whole purpose of scare campaigns in the first place. They just want you to be made more aware of some of the very dangerous issues in the world, so that you can learn how to prevent something bad happening to you...and most of the time, they actually work!
When I watched that video, I had to admit, I was grossed out. It definitely did make me want to become a healthier person. The only problem was that this video did not make me want to stick to the idea. Sure, upon watching it, I wanted to be a healthier person, and sure, upon watching it, I was dead set on banning sodas from ever touching my mouth again...but the next day, I believe I was guzzling down a can of Sprite. See, that's just it...scare campaigns are effective enough that they will get a message across, but they are not entirely effective enough on keeping that message in people's heads.
This is why further action is usually taken, and therefore, probably one of the reasons why the American government decided to propose a pop tax. Scare campaigns are just not going to cut it, especially for an issue like obesity. I definitely think that it is an enormous issue that needs to be addressed, and I'm sure many people do too. The long term effects have been scientifically proven to be dangerous and life-threatening. However, no matter how much facts and statistics you show people, most of us usually like to believe that these kinds of things will never happen to us. There are many people out there who choose to be ignorant and to plug their ears to the truth.
 |
| Most of us are like this, choosing to "hear no evil". (Source: http://tokopa.wordpress.com/2007/11/09/dreamspeak-under-the-override) |
It is because of these reasons why I am all for the pop tax, and I would very much like it imposed on Canada as well. If a tax was imposed here, then I know, for certain, that I would be spending less money to buy junk food, especially because junk food is already pretty expensive to begin with. Although pop isn't the main cause of obesity, I believe it will still make an enormous amount of difference, so it's worth it. Take a look at the plastic bag tax imposed on Toronto, for example. Though many people still use the plastic bags, there are even more people who now thinks twice before paying for and using a plastic bag. I, myself, have found that my friends and I barely use plastic bags when shopping - instead, we usually put our bought items in a backpack or purse that we've brought with us. The tax made us realize that we don't need plastic bags for every single item we buy, particularly if we only bought one or two items. Yes, maybe it didn't stop us from using plastic bags fully, but again, it still made a difference. I know I would be a healthier person if a pop tax was imposed. After all, every penny counts.
posted by Rowena @ 11:31 PM 0 Comments
#5: Photo Manipulation on Hiatus in the Media
at 11:29 PM
How do you feel about the photoshopped images gone bad? Can you think of any other examples where you have seen this and thought to yourself - "wow that looks strange!". Share one of those examples with us in your blog. Does it bother you that companies are constantly crossing the line with their manipulations - or do you see it as just the way it is? How about this new trend where models and celebrities are baring their make-up free faces and saying "no" to photoshop? Is it a trend that will stick? What about the idea of magazines and runways using "normal" people, like the young, the old and the size 16 ladies? What is your reaction when you look at a magazine spread that isn't all glammed up like we are used to seeing? Share any of your thoughts and ideas on any of these issues.
I remember when I first learned about Photoshop, I was in
the seventh grade. I thought it was the coolest thing in the world. I begged my
parents for it, but it was simply too expensive. I would have never expected
that something that I thought was so cool could cause such a huge controversy.
It makes me wonder - when Photoshop 1.0 was released in 1990, would the
creators have ever realized that their product would be the one that would
continously be blamed for the low self-esteem of everyone who is exposed to the
media? You hear articles in the media that constantly attack this product for
creating false, unrealistic beauty. However, what people do not realize is
photo tampering has been going on for years, and can even be seen from
photographs taken in the 1800’s! Look at these two photos, for example:
 |
| The image on the right was created by placing Abraham Lincoln's head on a Southern politican, John Calhoun's body. The original photograph is seen on the left. (Source: http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/index1.html) |
Being a very popular portrait of Abraham Lincoln, this is
clearly a photograph that has been tampered with so effectively that barely
anyone knows that the photograph was not original. It makes you wonder if there
really is anything genuine in this world, doesn’t it?
The good news (for us, at least) is that many photographs
that have been tampered with actually do look like they were tampered with.
Here is one such picture:
 |
| The head...does not fit...with...body...too funny...must go laugh!!! (Excuse me for a second). (Source: http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com) |
So, how exactly do I feel about photoshopped images gone
bad such as this one? Well, I think they are absolutely amazing (don't be shocked. I'll explain soon enough). Whenever someone points out
a photoshop disaster, in my head, I am thinking, “HAHA! That’s what these companies get!”.
To be honest, I really applaud these photoshopped images gone bad, simply because of the fact that they look so ridiculous, that we can easily pinpoint the mistakes made. I applaud them because it is these
kinds of mistakes that make us more aware of the fact that we really should not
believe everything we see in the media. The fact that we can look at a picture
and automatically see that it does not look real, because it really
isn’t genuine, shows that we, humans, are not as dumb as some businesses think we are. It is
these mistakes that makes our society come to the conclusion that the photos
we see in the media are unrealistic, and change is necessary.
The fact that we are able to point out these mistakes
bothers me at the same time, however, because it shows how far companies have
crossed the line. I really don’t like it!! Why do they have to set such
unrealistic expectations for beauty and tampering with things because they
think that’s what is perfect? Nobody’s perfect, therefore it will never
be accomplished, no matter what one does. Plus, real beauty is so much more
beautiful, and, in my opinion, is definitely the closest thing to perfection.
It is because of this particular reason why I really enjoy
the fact that a new trend is cultivating in the media: the trend in which the
media shows “normal” people for who they really are – no make-up, no
tamperings, no manipulative actions. The first time I looked at a magazine that
showed real beauty, and the first time I saw “normal” people in the
runways, I couldn’t help but be ecstatic! This is how the world should be! We
should not be deceived like we have been for so many years, and given unrealistic
expectations to beauty! Finally, a chance to be real!!
I’m really hoping that this trend sticks, but the fact that
we constantly strive for perfection, and the fact that businesses seem to always be doing what they can to make you buy their products really makes this
task seem impossible. However, I will continue to hope that this trend will never
disappear, and that, eventually, everyone will realize how beautiful they
really are...because, really, who needs technology to look perfect?
posted by Rowena @ 11:29 PM 0 Comments
#4: The Changing Face of Video Games
Monday, September 6, 2010 at 7:17 PM
In the past, games were solely created for the purpose of entertainment. Instead of going to the arcade, you could play Pong right at home. Later, Mario Bros. took homes by storm as Mario and Luigi embarked on adventures in living rooms. Later still, parents everywhere fretted that their children were spending way too much time playing video games and what kind of impact those games were having on their children. Games are definately evolving. They have changed drastically over the past three decades, not only in content, but in quality.Nintendo, especially, has taken strides to attract specific audiences that were not catered to in the past. For example, the Wii Fit was the first of what has now become a new genre in the video game world, "exergames," where the gamer becomes a physical participant in the game. A few other innovative themes include cooking, brain training, education and living a virtual life along with keeping virtual pets.The question is, have games evolved enough to the point that they are beneficial to you, rather than detrimental? Or are they merely wolves in sheep's clothing? If they appear too good to be true, maybe they are. Are these new game genres still considered games or have they evolved into something new? What do you think?
The very first game system I ever technically owned (the word 'technically' is used because it was originally a gift for my sister) was a Gameboy Colour. However, I never really got addicted to this game system until two years later, when my aunt gave her a Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets game console. I swear, this was the game that forever changed my viewpoint on video games. It was the first game that I absolutely, no matter how hard I tried, could not put down (it came to to the point that I could no longer hear my parents in the background yelling at me to wash the dishes because I was so indulged in the game). It was (and still is) my favourite game, even after going through my Neopets phase (and that means a lot, especially considering the fact that I was so addicted to Neopets that I even made my very own fan/graphics website for it [and a poor one at that, but I will never forget those days 'cause that's what got me so darn interested in computer arts anyway]).
Seven years later, and that game has not been touched since around the day of my 13th birthday (yes, I remember! Shush, okay, I have a very good memory at the oddest of times). The day of my 13th birthday was the day I got what I thought then was the most amazing, most clever invention ever invented in the history of all inventions...the invention that I thought would forever change mankind...no, not the cellphone (that's old news), nor is it the television (psh, television? I laugh at the very thought!), and, no, it's not even the Internet (like that thing can even compare!)...it was
THE WII.
Yes, ever since I first played it at my sister's friend's house on March of that same year, I knew that I just had to get one. I begged my parents every day to get me one. Then, on the morning of my 13th birthday, I opened that rectangular present that my parents had handed to me as soon as I got out of bed, and saw it. My life was complete.
I remember being so excited and so tremendously happy that I started playing it right away. I remember even almost being late for school that day because I was so indulged in the game. I couldn't stop. It was Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets all over again. I'm pretty sure when they realized this, my parents regretted ever giving me that present.
It's been about three years since, and the Wii is no longer used except for the odd party or two.
Don't get me wrong. I still think it's one of the most amazing inventions ever invented (though, today, I really don't think it can compare to cellphones, television, and especially the Internet). It's just I find that these game systems get in the way of you living your life (according to the story above, I was even starting to put it before my education!). Games today, especially, have made it easier for us to fall for this trap, what with evolving into these virtual reality, "you-are-actually-in-the-game!!!" kind of games...they now make it much easier to captivate players and get them addicted to the point where they'd rather play a video game than creating their own masterpiece (i.e., living their own life...haha, I'm so clever).
However, I can't forget about the advantages of today's newly evolved games. From my experience of playing them, I have learned that today's games have also definitely improved for the better: they will teach you more things about life, they will enhance your self-esteem and confidence more (the fact is, today's games seem to be more difficult than games in the past, therefore giving you a greater sense of accomplishment when you finally win a game), and, depending on what you take from the game you are playing, they can now improve your life (look at Wii Fit! The first time I played that game, I became so much more interested in living a healthier life!). Plus, the purpose of the creation of games in the first place was to give us, humans, something to keep ourselves occupied, and to have something to enjoy, and today's games are definitely more enjoyable than games in the past. So, in a way, these games are beneficial to us.
With that said, games, in my opinion, are neither wolves in a sheep's clothing, nor are they fully sheep. In other words, they are beneficial to an extent and detrimental to an extent. They aren't exactly to good to be true, but at the same time, they can be harmful to your health.The key here is really to be able to control how much and for how long you play a game (the recommended dosage, I believe, is less than two hours a day).
As stated previously, games have evolved tremendously, but even though most games have evolved to become virtual reality that allow you to actually be present in the game, they are still games. No matter what, they were still activities that were created to make lives a bit more pleasurable. No matter how different they are from the games in the past, today's games, are well, still games. They may be different (thus creating a new game genre), but they have not evolved into something completely new: they are still games. Most important, no matter how much you feel like you are in the game....no matter how real the game seems...it is still a game, and only a game, and therefore, it would be pointless to revolve your life around it.
| Yeah, games can really make you forget what is real and what is not. (Source: http://www.thecampussocialite.com/category/collegiate-life/gadgets-gizmos/page/2) |
However, I can't forget about the advantages of today's newly evolved games. From my experience of playing them, I have learned that today's games have also definitely improved for the better: they will teach you more things about life, they will enhance your self-esteem and confidence more (the fact is, today's games seem to be more difficult than games in the past, therefore giving you a greater sense of accomplishment when you finally win a game), and, depending on what you take from the game you are playing, they can now improve your life (look at Wii Fit! The first time I played that game, I became so much more interested in living a healthier life!). Plus, the purpose of the creation of games in the first place was to give us, humans, something to keep ourselves occupied, and to have something to enjoy, and today's games are definitely more enjoyable than games in the past. So, in a way, these games are beneficial to us.
| It can even give you some bonding time with family and friends!! (Source: http://www.quazen.com) |
With that said, games, in my opinion, are neither wolves in a sheep's clothing, nor are they fully sheep. In other words, they are beneficial to an extent and detrimental to an extent. They aren't exactly to good to be true, but at the same time, they can be harmful to your health.The key here is really to be able to control how much and for how long you play a game (the recommended dosage, I believe, is less than two hours a day).
As stated previously, games have evolved tremendously, but even though most games have evolved to become virtual reality that allow you to actually be present in the game, they are still games. No matter what, they were still activities that were created to make lives a bit more pleasurable. No matter how different they are from the games in the past, today's games, are well, still games. They may be different (thus creating a new game genre), but they have not evolved into something completely new: they are still games. Most important, no matter how much you feel like you are in the game....no matter how real the game seems...it is still a game, and only a game, and therefore, it would be pointless to revolve your life around it.
posted by Rowena @ 7:17 PM 0 Comments
#3: Social Awareness Contradiction
Tuesday, February 16, 2010 at 11:41 AM
Back in 2004 Dove started their Campaign for Real Beauty. This campaign was targeted at woman - encouraging women to realize that everyone is beautiful in their own unique way. A powerful message is being sent out to all who listen to this campaign. Here is their mission statement. Dove really wants woman to realize the kind of effects that the media has and how often we are all bombarded with images that can make us all question if we are truly beautiful.Later, Axe Body spray started their Axe Effect Campaign Ads. Many of us are already very aware of what these commercials are like - men using spray and women chasing after them - leading men to believe that using this spray will truly make this happen! (as if!!!)Here is the KICKER!!! Axe and Dove are owned by the same parent company - UNILEVER!!! (This is a company who has been named as one of the 2009 World's Most Ethical Companies list by the Ethisphere Institute.) So tell me this - how can this be right - one parent company with two "kid" companies with two completely opposing views!So here is some food for thought....1) How do you feel about the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty? Do some quick research if you don't know what this is about because it is worth knowing.2) How do you feel about the Axe Effect Campaign? Does it make you laugh hysterically or roll your eyes in disgust? Tell me why?3) Do you think that a 'parent' company has some responsibility to ensure that all of their different sectors uphold the same sort of beliefs and values? Tell me why or why not.
I remember when I first heard about the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty, all I wanted to do was just hug whoever thought of this campaign and squeeze them until they could no longer breathe (it's lucky that I didn't, because, you know, that would have been a tragedy).
I would have never expected that the same beautiful, lovely, wonderful people who I thought were just beautiful, lovely, and wonderful, were the same ones that created those Axe commercials, that, to be honest, makes me want to do the exact opposite of what the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty is telling me to do.
So, I went from wanting to hug those beautiful, lovely, wonderful people....to wanting to punch those so-called, beautiful, lovely, and wonderful people in the face.
You can probably see by now how strongly my opinions for both campaigns contradict.
The Dove Campaign for Beauty, on one hand is a very unique campaign that is actually doing good in the world. It offers and gives back any shred of hope that women have lost over the years due to the very unrealistic expectations of the media, and, in turn, society. For me, this was great because something that always bothered me was when people did not think they were beautiful. In my opinion, everyone in the world is beautiful, both inside and out. In fact, I have never met one person who has not inspired me because they were so beautiful. This is why I was so happy when this campaign was released. Finally! A chance for people to truly realize how beautiful they are!!
 |
| Hey, you! You're all beautiful!!!!! (Source: http://www.campaignforrealbeauty.com.au/inside-the-campaign/celebrate-those-curves.asp) |
The thing is, I guess I'm kind of a hypocrite when I say that everyone is beautiful, because I don't really include myself as part of 'everyone'...and if I think about it, that's just it! That's why campaigns like these are necessary, because even a person who thinks that everyone and everything in the world is beautiful can have low self-esteem! Campaigns like these are needed in the world!!! (One thing I didn't like, however, was that it was just addressed to women, and not both women and men, but still, they're doing a job well done).
This Axe Effect Campaign, however, truly defeats the purpose of the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty. Now, okay, I have to admit...when I first watched this commercial, I was laughing so hard that I was literally on the floor laughing (okay, floor, chair, same thing). However, when I watched it a second time, and the humour died off, I couldn't help noticing, "Oh my gosh. This girl is so skinny. And look at this girl! She's so tall! And OH MY GOSH, that girl has such luscious, long hair! Now, why can't I look like that?!"
Of course, I know that that wasn't the intention of the Axe Effect Campaign (at least I don't think that was their intention). I'm pretty sure their intention was for men to buy the product, but, of course, not to actually believe that all of these girls will come running after them. What they mainly intended to do was to get across the message that females actually enjoy the smell of their products. This whole Axe Effect Campaign, I'm sure, is just for comedic relief, and not necessarily to make people think that flocks of girls will come running after you if you use this perfume (because, really, how many boys do you know use that cologne in school, and how many girls come running through the doors of the school, covered in mud and dirt, in nothing but their bikinis, just because someone sprayed Axe on?) However, no matter what their main intention was, it still produced a negative effect, and (I'm sure) disappointed more people than those who found this ad absolutely hilarious.
So, what exactly do I think about the fact that these two campaigns are run by the same parent company? When I first heard this, I was appalled! Surely, the business world is not that deceiving and conniving! Little did I know that I was completely wrong. The fact that these two campaigns hold the exact opposite values and beliefs disgusts me. Though, yes, I do agree that this is a clever way to earn some profit from different markets, it's still a very repulsing thought! To explain why I think this idea disgusts me as much as it does, think about it this way: if Unilever's actions paralleled those of a person's, that specific person would be the kind of person to act like they're the greatest friend in the world in front of your face, but then describe you using the most cruel adjectives behind your back. There is a word in the English language that would best describe this company/person, and that word would be: two-faced.
In my opinion, a company that overlooks over different campaigns should definitely make sure that all of them hold the same sets of beliefs and values. It's not right to deceive some consumers into thinking that they believe in one thing, and then deceive other consumers into thinking that they believe in the exact opposite. As a company, they deserve the right to be ethical and corporate socially responsible, and this includes making sure their consumers know the kind of company they are buying their products from. They need to take into account the long-term effects. If this unethical behaviour continues, and people find out, this company might very well lose a large number of customers, which, after working so hard to deceive people to earn profit, is definitely not something this company wants.
This Axe Effect Campaign, however, truly defeats the purpose of the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty. Now, okay, I have to admit...when I first watched this commercial, I was laughing so hard that I was literally on the floor laughing (okay, floor, chair, same thing). However, when I watched it a second time, and the humour died off, I couldn't help noticing, "Oh my gosh. This girl is so skinny. And look at this girl! She's so tall! And OH MY GOSH, that girl has such luscious, long hair! Now, why can't I look like that?!"
Of course, I know that that wasn't the intention of the Axe Effect Campaign (at least I don't think that was their intention). I'm pretty sure their intention was for men to buy the product, but, of course, not to actually believe that all of these girls will come running after them. What they mainly intended to do was to get across the message that females actually enjoy the smell of their products. This whole Axe Effect Campaign, I'm sure, is just for comedic relief, and not necessarily to make people think that flocks of girls will come running after you if you use this perfume (because, really, how many boys do you know use that cologne in school, and how many girls come running through the doors of the school, covered in mud and dirt, in nothing but their bikinis, just because someone sprayed Axe on?) However, no matter what their main intention was, it still produced a negative effect, and (I'm sure) disappointed more people than those who found this ad absolutely hilarious.
So, what exactly do I think about the fact that these two campaigns are run by the same parent company? When I first heard this, I was appalled! Surely, the business world is not that deceiving and conniving! Little did I know that I was completely wrong. The fact that these two campaigns hold the exact opposite values and beliefs disgusts me. Though, yes, I do agree that this is a clever way to earn some profit from different markets, it's still a very repulsing thought! To explain why I think this idea disgusts me as much as it does, think about it this way: if Unilever's actions paralleled those of a person's, that specific person would be the kind of person to act like they're the greatest friend in the world in front of your face, but then describe you using the most cruel adjectives behind your back. There is a word in the English language that would best describe this company/person, and that word would be: two-faced.
 |
| Definitely not a pretty sight. |
posted by Rowena @ 11:41 AM 0 Comments
#2: Ads of the Past - Did they really say that?
at 11:36 AM
We all know that ads have been around longer than many of us. Some ads in the 50's and 60's used some great design concepts and had some pretty good messages, whereas other ads, well...make one wonder and ask, "were they joking?" Take a look at these ads closely and comment On each message that you see. Some will surprise you. Give us your opinion of the ads telling us whether or not you think the messages you see are appropriate. What do you think allowed these types of ads to run? What might these ads suggest about society in America at the time? Can you compare these ads with ads that are running today? What do you suppose these ads say about gender roles? Use your analytical skills to process what you see.I find it interesting how today, we find items such as floppy discs, hula hoops, and legwarmers odd, but in the past, these were the items that everyone just had to have. This just goes to show how different today's society is compared to how we were in the past. It also goes to show how the tastes of society are constantly changing. A million years from now, people will find things like skinny jeans, side bangs, and oh gosh, Twilight strange and think we were crazy.
...Well, at least that's the first thought that came into my mind when I saw these advertisements from the past. Seriously, what were they thinking?
Now, let's look at this first ad, shall we? The first word that catches my eye is "fat" and I immediately begin to think of all of those eating disorders like anorexia and bullimia (ironically, not obesity). What else is that I see? Tape worms? Oh dear gosh. Who knew that an advertisement from the past can tell so much about...well, people in the past? By looking at this ad, you can automatically assume that the popular way to lose weight back then was to eat tape worms. Though I really shouldn't be judgmental, I would just like to say one word: Yuck. But you know what, if you think about it, it's really quite similar to advertisements today. Look at this one:
 |
| The mysterious little green pill that will make you look absolutely hot! (Source: http://szittya.fortunecity.com/top-10-female-weight-loss-pills.html) |
It's not as gross as tape worms, sure, but the fact that we're still putting weird things in our mouth to lose weight says a lot about the kind of world we live in. Right now, we may think it's perfectly normal to put "a little green pill" in our bodies, but think about it...we don't even know what is actually in that little green pill. For all we know, it could be tapeworms themselves, or even something that could be thought of as equally repulsive as tapeworms, like an animal's intestines. If someone from the future sees this ad, they'd probably start thinking about how crazy we were for putting something like that in our mouths. Kind of ironic, don't you think?
Now, I look at the second ad ("Blow in her face and she'll follow you anywhere." Come on, really?), and oddly enough, it is quite similar to the first ad. How? Both ads ridicule humans. They simply think that we are fools enough to buy their products. In this ad, it leads consumers to actually believe that by smoking this particular brand, girls will swoon all over them. Well, simply stated, the creators of these ads were right. We are fools enough to believe that (well, we are fools enough to go ahead and buy their product, aren't we?).
Now, although they are two highly different products, this advertisement reminds me quite of a present-day ad:
 |
| This was the front page of the official website of Axe products, and I have to say...I find their banner (which is actually based one of their commercials/advertising campaigns) as strange as this cigarette ad. Oh, like us girls are really jungle cats ready to pounce on the next man who has a musky, very strong sort of odour that makes some people gag (okay...maybe, that's just me. I really dislike the smell of the cologne).
Let us put this ridiculous ad behind us (until later, where it will be ridiculed once, or twice more), and move on to this third ad, shall we?
|
"THEY'RE HAPPY BECAUSE THEY EAT LARD." - Now, this particular ad is ABSOLUTELY THE MOST HILARIOUS ADVERTISEMENT I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED!!!!! OH MY GOODNESS!!! (Excuse me while I go laugh...)
Okay, with that aside, you know what I honestly first thought when I saw this advertisement? McDonald's. Yes, that's right. This advertisement claims that by eating lard, it will bring you absolute happiness and bliss(!!!)....which, ironically, is also found in a variety of McDonald's ads. However, we don't find that strange, do we? Noo, we find it perfectly normal!
You're only saying that so we can buy your products. You're smart...it's working.
I'm pretty sure that what allowed this specific ad to run back then was the fact that the majority of people were eating lard...and knew that they were eating lard. We'd probably find it strange if we this ad today, but the thing is...many of us still eat lard! Lard is a fat, and according to one online article (click), it is much healthier than vegetable oil...which means that it is probably healthier than food from McDonald's.
On to the last ad (YAY)! To tell you the truth, this ad doesn't really have that much of an impact on me as did the other ads. One look at this, and I thought it made perfect sense why they would have this advertisement in the past. For starters, around the 50's and 60's, the wealthiest families owned tobacco farms, and anyone who was anyone smoked cigarettes. They smoked, it seemed, every second of the day, not knowing any of the consequences. It wasn't until later that the truth was revealed: CIGARETTES GIVE YOU LUNG CANCER! IT'S UNHEALTHY FOR YOU! CIGARETTES ARE BAD, I TELL YOU! BAD!!!!!!!
Ergo, this ad didn't surprise me much. Quite frankly, it reminded me of those toothpaste ads we see today, where they would show statistics regarding professionals and their product:
 |
| Have you ever realized that in most advertisements regarding dental hygiene, there is always 1 out of 5 dentists who doesn't recommend the product?
So, what exactly were they thinking when they allowed these types of ads to run in the past? Simple. They were thinking about the consumers. They were thinking about what would appeal to their target market the most, which, may I add, is something that companies do today as well, so really, we shouldn't be too harsh on these companies for making ads that we seem to think are absolutely ridiculous. In the past, tape worms, lard, cigarettes...they were all the rage back then! We also can't forget the fact that women were seen as the inferior sex, while men were seen as the superior gender (in fact, we still have not defeated sexism, but I have to agree, we are improving), which is probably the reason why these ads seem to worship men in all their glory (SHE WILL FOLLOW YOU ANYWHERE!!!!), while women seem to be shown as unintelligent.
|
Eh, but what can you do? It's not like you can travel back in time, and prevent these types of ads from running. Fads, trends, and society in general change all the time. All we can really do is just, well, learn from it and move on.
posted by Rowena @ 11:36 AM 1 Comments
#1: Hey Guess What? I Can See You...
Sunday, February 14, 2010 at 5:00 PM
On Oct 7, 2009 Google launched their new application called Google Street View. This application allows people to search addresses and view, from street level, photographs that were taken of the area. Google decided to drive around selected cities with vans that had a 360 degree view video camera attached to the top. When completed, they compiled all these images to create one large 360 degree photographic map.All I can say is, "Wow, Google, wow." Luckily for you, no matter how far you zoom in on my building, no matter how many times you click on the addition sign, no matter how many times you wish on a shooting star, it is quite impossible to actually see the inside of my apartment. Luckily for you, I also have curtains. Otherwise, I think I might have to kill you.
However, unfortunately for me, even if I didn't live in an apartment, nor have curtains, it is impossible for me to kill you because, well, you are an inanimate object. Not to mention the fact that if I kill someone, even if I don't get caught, I would have to live the rest of my life with this unforgivable, tormenting guilt that would make it impossible for me to get up in the morning. Of course, I wouldn't want that to happen. I have units to do.
Ay, I'm simply getting off topic here. Forgive me for my, er, weird anger issues. It's just, I get so, well, I wouldn't actually call it angry, but rather uncomfortable with the fact that oh look, here's another thing in the world that could help stalkers to, well, stalk me, without my permission! Oh, cruel world, why do you have to be so...cruel?
Let me show you what I saw when I searched up my address: (Disclaimer - In fear of stalkers, this may or may not be my actual house/apartment/home.)
 |
| Oh look! A lovely tree is blocking my view! |
Now imagine if I was outside on "my" balcony at the time the Google van was taking this picture. Even though Google blurs faces, if you look carefully, you would eventually figure out that there is a teenage girl living in that apartment (or, for the case of the people who think I don't look like a teen, a little girl [-_-]). In both cases, I would still be a target for stalkers. In fact, even if I was a 50-year old man, I would still be a target for stalkers. What if I was one of those people who changed their identity in order to be safe from criminals trying to kill me? If the girl on the balcony looks like me (because it is me), then BAM! I would no longer be safe living in this apartment. I would no longer be safe living in this country!
Even worse, what if this was the picture that appeared on Google Street View:
 |
| Is this even possible? Would the tree be able to withstand such weight? Can thoughts be seen? |
I would be grounded for life if my parents saw this, and who do I have to blame for that? Google. Then, there would be a huge controversy because the oh-so-popular website would be hearing from my lawyers. No joke. All of them got an 80 percent or above on the History debate - I would so win.
Yes, yes, I know. I shouldn't be so mean to Google and this application. I know it was made for a good reason. I mean, even I use it (aren't I such a hypocrite?). No, I don't use it to stalk people (or do I?). I mainly use it for travel purposes. For example, if I were to take the bus by myself to a place I've never been to before, it helps to see what the surroundings of the area looks like so that the chances of me getting lost are smaller ("Okay, so there's a huge tree on the left side of the building, a bus stop in front..."). Also, think about how helpful this application must be for land developers, architects, or other similar jobs. Because this application shows practically every place in the world, it helps those working in the fields mentioned above to see the best places to construct buildings, roads, etcetera. It's also great for security, because there's a very good chance that this application has caught some people committing crimes, don't you think? The pictures were taken randomly and unexpectedly to most of the public - most people would not have known that a van with a 360 degree camera was taking a picture of them.
You know what, I think that's the main reason why Google made this application in the first place. They wouldn't have made this with the secret motive of making it easier for stalkers or criminals who know a certain person they want to get rid of in the world. No. Google has been a trusted site for many years; they made this application in order to make it easier for people everywhere to, well live their life. They were simply thinking of what would make life easier for us. I really don't think we should go around being angry at them. (Sorry Google!)
So, do I agree or disagree with what Google has done by making this application? Yes, I agree. I really don't think they should get rid of the application entirely. That's propesterous. It really does help a lot of people everywhere, myself included.
However, I still think they have to address the fact that everyone's privacy and security is being threatened by this application. Just because the photographs are taken in a public place, it does not necessarily mean that they are allowed to post pictures of people like that without their permission (and no, Google, blurring faces doesn't really help). I don`t want to use a specific example, because I don't want to violate anyone`s privacy, but if you were to pick a random person on the street and look carefully, at the right angle, you'd be able to determine the person in the picture. You may think that there's a one in a million chance that a person looking will actually be able determine who person is, but think about it again. People today are much smarter than before. By knowing a small fact such as what clothes a person was wearing on a certain day, you're able to conduct more research and eventually determine that person's identity. As you can see, Google does not blur clothes.
So, Google, think again if blurring faces really does anything. Oh, and you may want to take a look again at Canada's privacy laws. Now, since I am not really a lawyer, nor do I have the proper knowledge, I'm not actually certain if Google is breaking any laws (I mean, if they were, something would have happened sooner, right? Google is a massively popular organization), but look what I found while researching random things from the Internet because I am that cool - The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms! Dun dun dun!
7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.Excuse me? What was that? "Everyone has the right to....security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof...." Everyone has the right to security! Everyone has the right to feel secure! Did you not see how I reacted in the beginning of this post? Does that seem like a secure person to you? No, I don't think so! There are many people out there that are uncomfortable releasing pictures of themselves, especially on the Internet. I really don't think Google should be doing it for them and therefore making them feel any less secure. Do you want people refusing to go outside in fear that a Google van will unexpectedly come along taking a picture of them? Again, I'm not exactly sure if Google is breaking any laws, but since the statement above is in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it must count for something, right?
Let me conclude this uber long post by suggesting to you, Google, some things you can do to avoid threatening the feeling of security of so many people around the world. What about erasing every possible being that can be seen, instead of just simply blurring out their faces? And don't just end it with humans - do the same things for license plates, and material possessions that could be seen on someone's property (such as a lawnmower or bicycle on someone's front yard) because knowing someone's possessions can still put a person at risk. This is a gruesome task, I know, but it's much better to take such a precaution before realizing that you're losing users because everyone hates you. If erasing is impossible, you can replace the items listed above with something else. Here's an example:
 |
| Ta Da! Doesn't it look wonderful? |
Yes, I know it looks unattractive, but at least it would guarantee that everyone would feel safe and secure going out in public. I think that's more important than looking professional, don't you think?
posted by Rowena @ 5:00 PM 5 Comments
Hello there, lovely bloggers!
Monday, January 11, 2010 at 2:45 PM
:O
Not anymore!
Yay. :)
Yay. :)
So, welcome to my wonderful media blog created for the wonderful Media Arts course taught by my wonderful teacher, Ms. Arturi (Hi Miss!). Hopefully, I'm allowed to have this opening message. It just seems too...hmm, what do you call it...abrupt to suddenly start with the unit itself. I think a welcoming message is necessary, don't you think?
So, WELCOME ALL! :D
Just in case I'm not allowed to have this opening message, may I just say that Media Arts is the best, but my teacher, Ms. Arturi is even better? ;D
Oh, also,
Hi, Mrs. Powell :)
(You're an awesome TA, aha)
Oh, also,
Hi, Mrs. Powell :)
(You're an awesome TA, aha)
posted by Rowena @ 2:45 PM 0 Comments