"Salespeak," by Roy F. Fox

I thought the story in the beginning of this article with Pepsi Anderson and her experience in school was a little annoying and outrageous. Fox could have gotten his point across in a more realistic way. But I guess he thinks he is being realistic, since he later says that Pepsi's world is already here. I think he exaggerated more than just "a few other parts." I do agree with his point that it's an issue that sales companies target kids in their advertising. I thought it was interesting was he said about how school administrators in Michigan are considering auctioning off school names to the highest bidder. I can surely see how this is a problem, however, if the bid was high and the money went to school funds, I can also see the justification. Speaking of names, Fox says he hasn't heard of a human being legally named after a product or service....I recently read that Matthew McConaughey's brother named his son Miller Lite. No joke.
I agree that "salespeak is more that a voice we hear and see: we also wear it, smell it, touch it, play with it." But did Fox ever get to a real point? I couldn't find one.

"When a Risque Online Persona Undermines a Chance for a Job" by Alan Finder: p. 165

This article talks about how some companies do online searches on their job candidates. And that now, employers are looking at sites like Facebook and MySpace, where students often post photographs and comments about drinking, recreational drug use, and sexual exploits. It says that some mistakenly believe that these pages are private, but that companies can gain access to information in several ways. I have a facebook, but the settings on my page limit access to it. I think? I have heard of people changing their name on Facebook to their first and middle name instead of first and last, but I'm pretty sure that as long as your privacy settings are applied, you should be safe. I agree with the many career counselors that advise students to review their pages and remove photographs and texts that you wouldn't want your grandmother or potential employers to see. And I will definitely keep my Facebook page set on private...I hope that's enough to keep people I don't want seeing my page away from it.

Response to, "What's Wrong With Cinderella?" p. 133-43

In this article, author and activist Peggy Orenstein asks what to make of princess culture. She is a longtime feminist journalist who is raising a 3-year-old daughter. She seems a little psycho to me. She flipped out in the dentist office when the dentist said to her daughter, "Would you like to sit in my special princess throne so I can sparkle your teeth?" If I were the dentist I would have thought she was a crazy bitch. I agree with what Andy Mooney, former Nike exec, told Orenstein (after talking about the Power Rangers and Ninja Turtles phase that boys go through) "The boy passes through. The girl passes through. I see girls expanding their imagination through visualizing themselves as princesses...and end up becoming lawyers, doctors, mothers, or princesses, whatever the case may be." I don't think that playing princess damages young girls. As long as the parents don't completely spoil the shit out of them. I always loved Disney princess like Jasmine and Ariel, but my parents never bought me tons of frilly purses and t-shirts that say "Spoiled." I think this woman is overreacting and overanalyzing. As long as she doesn't turn her daughter into a spoiled brat, I think that liking princesses is more than fine.

"Leading a Double Life," by Irene Sege

This article was very weird. Rather, it was about a very weird topic. It talks of the next potential cyber phenomenon called Second Life. "Second Life is a website where users create animated cartoon avatars to represent themselves - usually as humans...and sometimes as fanciful or furry creatures. They role play, gamble, teach classes, make music, open restaurants, push politics..." Weird. I'm not into it. Some guy even has a vitual wedding business, and when a woman behind his avatar friend died, he "typed words of comfort to her son's avatar and was comforted himself by his avatar friends. He conducted her virtual funeral." I think this is bizarre! I can't even understand it. And apparently people sell things and money changes hands, but I don't understand, is that Second Life money or real money? I don't get what the appeal or the fun is here, it just is too weird for me. But to each his own I guess!

Gerhardt: "The Rules of Attribution"

This articles first talks about the plagiarism of the bright young writer, Kaavya Viswanathan, in her novel How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and Got a Life. Gerhardt points out that we should not condemn Viswanathan, but that we should try to understand how she got confused about the rules of plagiarism. Gerhardt feels that students are not being taught the rules of copyright infringement and plagiarism in their writing. I guess I can see how some people would get confused, because you have to give credit to another author's ideas, even if you put them into your own words. I'm pretty sure this is what happened to Viswanathan - she didn't copy word for word, and she didn't do it on purpose. But I think this rule is pretty clearly stated, so I'm not sure how a Harvard student could have missed it.
By the way, I didn't know that Shakespeare recast the plot of Tristan and Isolde to make Romeo and Juliet, so this was and interesting new fact.
Like Gerhardt says, most of our ideas are borrowed, learned, recycled. I see how this relates to pop culture in the "music that uses riffs from other songs, ...books that are turned into movies, and then the characters from those movies" that show up on products like backpacks, toys, and video games. We just have to remember that through copyright licenses, credit is being given where it is due, and this is the main point of the article.

Popular Culture in the Twenty-First Century - Bill Ivey and Steven J. Tepper

This reading first asks us to consider what it would be like to live in the late nineteenth century. Our values and activities would have been shaped primarily by local experiences. But there has been a transformation in American culture. Technology, art and entertainment, and the rise in amateur art-making have all contributed greatly to this change. An interesting part of this reading was the mentioning of rap musicians who got their start by making homemade tape recordings. This stood out to me because my brother is into rap music and listens to a lot of mixtapes and demos of his favorite rappers. This reading also points out the fact that "through new devices like the iPod or TiVo, citizens are increasingly capable of curating their own cultural experiences - exploring new types of culture, choosing when and how they want to experience art and entertainment." I never thought of it like that, but I agree with it. I also found the mentioning of the "creative energy that is animating a new generation of young people" to be very intriguing, especially because we've been talking about what creativity means in one of my other classes (Creativity in the Classroom). In that class we've decided that creativity has to involve something new or unique. This relates to this text because in talking about this creative energy permeating through young people it tells of a survey of incoming college freshmen. The survey reported that more students today than a decade ago want to produce an original piece of art or become accomplished in a performing art or writing. It was cool to make a connection from this class to another one!

test posting

testing