Imagine am episode of "Intervention" (you know the one that chronicles the lives and-duh-interventions of addicts). Imagine the typical opening scene of the addict, curiously hunched over something; face twisted into that obsessively determined snarl.
Cut to a shot of the family member, visibly distraught and barely audible as they try to describe the sickness that has overtaken their loved one.
Then back to the desparate individual--a quick glance over her shoulder at the camera long enough to shout an emphatic "get outta here!!" before turning her back to the audience in a feeble attempt to keep her drug of choice out of sight.
But it's too late. The camera has caught a glimpse of-and is now zooming in on-her fingers tapping and scrolling away with frightening familiarity on a small, sleek, sexy little iPhone.
A quick close-up reveals the view of the addict: a never-ending list of brightly colored squares denoting promising and captivating applications. Scroll tap. Scroll tap. Brisk thumb movements. Audio of the family member reminising the good old days when she was sociable, approachable, normal...now only a shell of that lovable person. Her head never lifts. The phone never leaves her hand (shot of the addict holding the phone in the shower, hand and phone covered by a transparent ziplock bag, scrolling away).
Then the shots of the deplorable living conditions, unkept with filth by the stacks (including the fridge containing only a carton of take-out that has clearly grown legs), with the addict just slumped in a corner...scrolling and tapping....."hundreds of dollars a month", the family is saying through uncontrollable sobs.
................you get the picture..................
But don't you dare giggle or wave those disturbing-however ridiculous- images from your mind. There's nothing funny about waking up, phone still in hand, and immediately resuming an endless search for the next most amazing and absolutely necessary iPhone application. ...Downloading five different applications that do virtually the same thing to find the perfect combination of desirable user-interface (U.I. for you tech junkies) and maximum functionality.... Spending $16 on the perfect instant messaging app because it combines all of your favorite platforms into one beautiful little app with all the essential features...
So what if I have two navigation apps because one tells me what and where to eat while the other tells me what kinds of fun I can get into within a 20 mile radius following dinner! So what!!
Fifty-one applications is not only not a big deal, but necessary-alright?! I need that 3D labrynth game and I had to have crash bandicoot, also in 3D, at my fingertips! I need to know what to cook for dinner and how and which isle it's on! And you can't say you don't want to have instant access to what all of the major news sources around the world are saying is important--at 4am... in the bathroom... in line at the grocery store your beloved iPhone helped you find... maybe even in class...because the news doesn't wait people!!!
Hey, maybe I'm writing this on my latest app store purchase!!
Don't judge me!! I can quit whenever I want.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Monday, April 21, 2008
From the Waste Land to the Promised Land
April 4, 2008 marked 40 years since Martin Luther King, Jr., arguably the most important figure of the 1960's Civil Rights Movement, was shot to death on a hotel balcony. In March of 1968, Dr. King, in what would be his final mission,traveled to the aid of Memphis sanitation workers in the midst of a battle for higher wages. The detestable mistreatment of these sanitation workers culminated with the deaths of Echol Cole and Robert Walker who were crushed in the back of an old garbage truck; compacted like the trash they collected.
An article by Miami Herald columnist, Leonard Pitts, ran in the Dallas Morning News on April 6 detailing the events leading up to Dr. King's final breath. King's last campaign thoroughly described the rarely-discussed, highly-volatile situation into which King marched. According to Pitts, "MLK helped these men turn their demand for higher wages into a demand for something more". From the march Dr. King led that erupted into violence, to the infamous speech in which he declared "I've seen the Promised Land", Pitts walks his readers through some of the less-publicized thoughts and plans that plagued King in his final days.
In the days surrounding this momentous occasion, television specials and public service announcements permeated the channels of our television sets. News channels, such as CNN, aired specials that spanned several days as they covered the life Dr. King and attempted to unveil little known facts surrounding his murder. A common thread that repeatedly appeared in these tributes was the speculation that King foresaw his own death. Writers and reporters alike (including Pitts) sited sections of speeches King gave in February and March during which he mentioned his own death. In each of these orations, King appears to come to grips with the escalating danger facing him on a daily basis and talks of accepting the fact that his death may come earlier than many may have hoped. I find myself questioning when and why the focus shifted to such a topic. Is there an underlying attempt to attach a sort of mystical or angelic quality to Dr. King? To place Dr. King somewhere between a man and a spiritual being in touch with things we could never see?
Not to dampen the beautiful tributes and well-written articles reminding us of Dr. King's legacy, but let us not take the focus off of the objective of Dr. King's life's work. While it is enlightening to learn of King's very real reckoning with mortality, let us instead focus on allowing his memory to re-spark that fervor for striving towards social and economic equality.
An article by Miami Herald columnist, Leonard Pitts, ran in the Dallas Morning News on April 6 detailing the events leading up to Dr. King's final breath. King's last campaign thoroughly described the rarely-discussed, highly-volatile situation into which King marched. According to Pitts, "MLK helped these men turn their demand for higher wages into a demand for something more". From the march Dr. King led that erupted into violence, to the infamous speech in which he declared "I've seen the Promised Land", Pitts walks his readers through some of the less-publicized thoughts and plans that plagued King in his final days.
In the days surrounding this momentous occasion, television specials and public service announcements permeated the channels of our television sets. News channels, such as CNN, aired specials that spanned several days as they covered the life Dr. King and attempted to unveil little known facts surrounding his murder. A common thread that repeatedly appeared in these tributes was the speculation that King foresaw his own death. Writers and reporters alike (including Pitts) sited sections of speeches King gave in February and March during which he mentioned his own death. In each of these orations, King appears to come to grips with the escalating danger facing him on a daily basis and talks of accepting the fact that his death may come earlier than many may have hoped. I find myself questioning when and why the focus shifted to such a topic. Is there an underlying attempt to attach a sort of mystical or angelic quality to Dr. King? To place Dr. King somewhere between a man and a spiritual being in touch with things we could never see?
Not to dampen the beautiful tributes and well-written articles reminding us of Dr. King's legacy, but let us not take the focus off of the objective of Dr. King's life's work. While it is enlightening to learn of King's very real reckoning with mortality, let us instead focus on allowing his memory to re-spark that fervor for striving towards social and economic equality.
Monday, April 14, 2008
A Lesson In Acronyms: They're Not the One's You Grew Up With
Laser. Light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation.
Radar. Radio detection and ranging.
NASA. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
What happened to the days when acronyms were just that simple? Now, popular television commercials poke fun at the very real phenomenon that has become its own pseudo-language. An SMS (short messaging service)-aka text messaging-language.
OMG: Oh my goodness/gosh/God. LOL: Laugh out loud. BRB: Be right back.
These are now familiar staples of text messaging shorthand. This language has infiltrated the lives of our youngsters and, in many cases, replaced their use of acceptable English grammar; even in their school writing assignments.
Now, the latest commercial for the popular television teen drama, Gossip Girl, flashes the acronym "OMFG" (you'll have to fill in that 'F' for yourself) while provocative sex scenes unfold in the background. This widely watched TV show, with its highly impressionable audience, uses sex and expletive-laden, new-age acronyms to draw its viewers into this week's episode.
I think this raises a couple of questions:
1. Is it now OK to show "text language" with curse words that aren't allowed to be spoken on TV? When my 3 year old nephew, who's just learned his letters and is amazing at picking them out, started repeating "OMFG!" (along with the "bowchikawowow" tune he learned from another commercial)-do I tell him that's not a nice word?
2. Is anybody going to rein in the kiddos using these terms? As long as it's just the acronym, is it OK to use in the classroom? If not, then what about the ever-popular "B.S"?
In the end, this is just another case of re-drawing lines... So, where do they go?
Radar. Radio detection and ranging.
NASA. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
What happened to the days when acronyms were just that simple? Now, popular television commercials poke fun at the very real phenomenon that has become its own pseudo-language. An SMS (short messaging service)-aka text messaging-language.
OMG: Oh my goodness/gosh/God. LOL: Laugh out loud. BRB: Be right back.
These are now familiar staples of text messaging shorthand. This language has infiltrated the lives of our youngsters and, in many cases, replaced their use of acceptable English grammar; even in their school writing assignments.
Now, the latest commercial for the popular television teen drama, Gossip Girl, flashes the acronym "OMFG" (you'll have to fill in that 'F' for yourself) while provocative sex scenes unfold in the background. This widely watched TV show, with its highly impressionable audience, uses sex and expletive-laden, new-age acronyms to draw its viewers into this week's episode.
I think this raises a couple of questions:
1. Is it now OK to show "text language" with curse words that aren't allowed to be spoken on TV? When my 3 year old nephew, who's just learned his letters and is amazing at picking them out, started repeating "OMFG!" (along with the "bowchikawowow" tune he learned from another commercial)-do I tell him that's not a nice word?
2. Is anybody going to rein in the kiddos using these terms? As long as it's just the acronym, is it OK to use in the classroom? If not, then what about the ever-popular "B.S"?
In the end, this is just another case of re-drawing lines... So, where do they go?
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Latest Teen Trauma Means the Blame Game Has a New Opponent
The newest trend of "cyber bullying" has reached a new low. In addition to using websites like JuicyCampus and Facebook to terrorize their peers, teens have begun to use YouTube as a means of victimization.
CNN, along with several other networks and news outlets both mainstream and alternative, released a video of a 16-year-old girl being brutally beaten by six teenage girls from her school in Florida. The teenage girls, along with two teenage boys, lured the girl into a house where they proceeded to attack her for more than 30 minutes. The teenage boys kept watch outside of the house as the girls, both individually and collectively, beat the victim until she fell unconscious. The girls began the assault again after she regained consciousness. The attack was video-taped by several of the girls and posted on YouTube.
As the networks replayed the brutal beating over and over again, one could not help but become intrigued by the sheer disregard for human life that these girls displayed as they continued to assault the victim even as she screams for mercy from the fetal position.
The parents of the victim, who was hospitalized with blurred vision and hearing loss, began to speak out via the news networks against the websites YouTube and MySpace saying that "MySpace is the anti-Christ for our children". The suspects involved in the beating alleged that the victim had bad-mouthed them on MySpace.
And so began the blame game...who's fault is it?
Analysts are now beginning to point fingers in the direction of these popular networking and gossip sites as the culprits for influencing such violent and reckless behavior. They claim that the enticing "anyone can be famous" premise of YouTube and an ever-increasing shock tolerance has driven teens into a cycle of progressively appalling behavior. These individuals propose that kids do not see the postings made to these websites as punishable behavior and; therefore, feel virtually untouchable. As a result, using these websites as a means of torture or victimization has become commonplace.
Simply looking at the extensive comment lists on various blogs and news sites will show the intense debate on the subject. Proponents of the sites claim that it is not fair to blame these useful tools for those who use them inappropriately. Individuals of a variety of ages left comments criticizing everyone and everything including the girls, the sites, the parents, and even the victim for refusing to physically defend herself.
While it is not shocking that we find ourselves playing another round of blame game-teenage behavior edition, the area of cyber-bullying is unchartered territory. Do these new issues indicate that the reins should be tighter on these sites and those that use them? Ask the eight teenagers who will be tried as adults and could be facing life in prison for what, I'm sure, they thought was a good idea at the time.
CNN, along with several other networks and news outlets both mainstream and alternative, released a video of a 16-year-old girl being brutally beaten by six teenage girls from her school in Florida. The teenage girls, along with two teenage boys, lured the girl into a house where they proceeded to attack her for more than 30 minutes. The teenage boys kept watch outside of the house as the girls, both individually and collectively, beat the victim until she fell unconscious. The girls began the assault again after she regained consciousness. The attack was video-taped by several of the girls and posted on YouTube.
As the networks replayed the brutal beating over and over again, one could not help but become intrigued by the sheer disregard for human life that these girls displayed as they continued to assault the victim even as she screams for mercy from the fetal position.
The parents of the victim, who was hospitalized with blurred vision and hearing loss, began to speak out via the news networks against the websites YouTube and MySpace saying that "MySpace is the anti-Christ for our children". The suspects involved in the beating alleged that the victim had bad-mouthed them on MySpace.
And so began the blame game...who's fault is it?
Analysts are now beginning to point fingers in the direction of these popular networking and gossip sites as the culprits for influencing such violent and reckless behavior. They claim that the enticing "anyone can be famous" premise of YouTube and an ever-increasing shock tolerance has driven teens into a cycle of progressively appalling behavior. These individuals propose that kids do not see the postings made to these websites as punishable behavior and; therefore, feel virtually untouchable. As a result, using these websites as a means of torture or victimization has become commonplace.
Simply looking at the extensive comment lists on various blogs and news sites will show the intense debate on the subject. Proponents of the sites claim that it is not fair to blame these useful tools for those who use them inappropriately. Individuals of a variety of ages left comments criticizing everyone and everything including the girls, the sites, the parents, and even the victim for refusing to physically defend herself.
While it is not shocking that we find ourselves playing another round of blame game-teenage behavior edition, the area of cyber-bullying is unchartered territory. Do these new issues indicate that the reins should be tighter on these sites and those that use them? Ask the eight teenagers who will be tried as adults and could be facing life in prison for what, I'm sure, they thought was a good idea at the time.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Could've Been Another Waco
I am sure that, as the headlines blasted the news of the latest religious compound bust-up, flashes of David Koresh and the flames that engulfed that compound crept into readers’ minds.
News of a raid on the YFZ Ranch in Eldorado, Texas broke Saturday afternoon. CNN’s headline reported that more than 100 children were removed from a polygamist colony “in Texas”, causing the hairs on my arms and neck to stand at attention. It wasn’t until later (when I had an opportunity to read CNN’s article via Blackberry) that I was momentarily comforted.
“I was fearful that it would be another Waco…and with a town this small, a Waco would be devastating,”-Eldorado resident, Jimalee Dutton.
As I read on and found that the members of this colony are from the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I find myself, once again, questioning religion and its many variations and doctrines. How is it that Christ can be a part of their beliefs, yet horrific things like arranged marriages between 50-year-old men and 16-year-old girls are regular practices. This, then, led me to question our morals and heroic role as many other religions worldwide encourage similar behavior.
Unfortunately, these queries are matters for one with infinite wisdom. However, one thing is for certain, the activities going on beyond the gates and guards of Warren Jeffs’s compound are illegal and should be stopped. One can be thankful that the rescue of those many women and children took place before we witnessed another Waco.
219 Children, women taken from sect’s ranch-CNN (April 5, 2008)
News of a raid on the YFZ Ranch in Eldorado, Texas broke Saturday afternoon. CNN’s headline reported that more than 100 children were removed from a polygamist colony “in Texas”, causing the hairs on my arms and neck to stand at attention. It wasn’t until later (when I had an opportunity to read CNN’s article via Blackberry) that I was momentarily comforted.
“I was fearful that it would be another Waco…and with a town this small, a Waco would be devastating,”-Eldorado resident, Jimalee Dutton.
As I read on and found that the members of this colony are from the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I find myself, once again, questioning religion and its many variations and doctrines. How is it that Christ can be a part of their beliefs, yet horrific things like arranged marriages between 50-year-old men and 16-year-old girls are regular practices. This, then, led me to question our morals and heroic role as many other religions worldwide encourage similar behavior.
Unfortunately, these queries are matters for one with infinite wisdom. However, one thing is for certain, the activities going on beyond the gates and guards of Warren Jeffs’s compound are illegal and should be stopped. One can be thankful that the rescue of those many women and children took place before we witnessed another Waco.
219 Children, women taken from sect’s ranch-CNN (April 5, 2008)
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Well, If Barbara Walter's Says You're Sexy...
Barack Obama made an appearance on The View last Friday adding to the number of cable TV interviews and appearances he has up on Mrs. Clinton. (Remind me, again, how he beat Hillary to the punch on this one? It's The View for heavens sake!)
One might have expected the usual banter between hosts while the guest struggles to get a word in edgewise; however, this was not the case. Instead, the highly opinionated women of the morning talk-show were utterly silent as Obama basically gave mini-speech answers. Even the audience was quiet as Obama recapped the major topics such as the dead horse (aka: the Rev. Wright situation) and his health care plan. It was as if everyone was in a trance.
But of course, after Obama delivers a joke and a smile, the women snap out of it and revert to treating him like the average guest again by peppering him with ridiculous questions like "is it true you're related to Brad Pitt somehow?" or embarrassing statements like "well, you know, we all think you're very sexy". That last pearl of wisdom was delivered by none other than Barbara Walters herself. And as we all know, if Barbara thinks you're sexy...
One might have expected the usual banter between hosts while the guest struggles to get a word in edgewise; however, this was not the case. Instead, the highly opinionated women of the morning talk-show were utterly silent as Obama basically gave mini-speech answers. Even the audience was quiet as Obama recapped the major topics such as the dead horse (aka: the Rev. Wright situation) and his health care plan. It was as if everyone was in a trance.
But of course, after Obama delivers a joke and a smile, the women snap out of it and revert to treating him like the average guest again by peppering him with ridiculous questions like "is it true you're related to Brad Pitt somehow?" or embarrassing statements like "well, you know, we all think you're very sexy". That last pearl of wisdom was delivered by none other than Barbara Walters herself. And as we all know, if Barbara thinks you're sexy...
Monday, March 31, 2008
The Princess and the Paps
I’d like to propose an equation:
Mental illness + star power and money + crude curiosity / greed = a cyclical disaster resulting in a downward spiral of those on all sides
This equation explains the tumultuous situation surrounding the infamous Britney Spears.
An article by David Samuels in The Atlantic chronicles the rise of an industry that helped contribute to the dramatic and notorious fall of Spears. According to the article, it all started when Bonnie Fuller took over Us Weekly and began the trademark photo-feature “Stars-They’re Just Like US” which featured celebrities engaging in regular day-to-day activities. She tapped into a market that was interested in knowing that stars enjoy coffee and have to pump gas and, believe it or not, have to eat--just like us normal people. Needless to say, she hit the jackpot and spawned an industry that considers an exclusive picture of a celebrity pregnancy worth 5 or 6 figures.
As a result, little cults of “paps” have popped up and begun literally stalking stars for an opportunity to get a shot of--well, anything. These men, recruited from pizza delivery chains and valet parking services, are armed with telephoto lenses and digital cameras and responsible for hunting down celebrities no matter the cost. We, the public, just look on as car crashes and physical altercations take place as a consequence of the reckless behavior of these paparazzi. The so-called photographers will do anything, including a practice known as “door-stepping”, which involves waiting outside the entrance to a celebrity’s home for 12 or 14 hours, just hoping for a shot of anything at all.
And what do we do? We buy into it. The industry only survives because we, the public, suck up every piece of trash they dish out to us. These masters of mindless destruction are counting on us to soak up these ridiculous photos and the nonsensical captions attached. We help to perpetuate the cycle and are thus aiding in the destruction of human lives like that of Britney Spears. While we complain and grimace at the behaviors of both the star and the paps, we continue to fuel the fire. So why would they stop?
So I pose the question: who is the villain? The mentally ill Spears who thrives on the attention, sometimes going so far as to help stage photos (a practice also enjoyed by stars like Paris Hilton-go figure)? The insensitive paparazzi who risk the lives of others for a shot of her picking her nose or showing her private parts? Or the readers who continue to buy the product?
Mental illness + star power and money + crude curiosity / greed = a cyclical disaster resulting in a downward spiral of those on all sides
This equation explains the tumultuous situation surrounding the infamous Britney Spears.
An article by David Samuels in The Atlantic chronicles the rise of an industry that helped contribute to the dramatic and notorious fall of Spears. According to the article, it all started when Bonnie Fuller took over Us Weekly and began the trademark photo-feature “Stars-They’re Just Like US” which featured celebrities engaging in regular day-to-day activities. She tapped into a market that was interested in knowing that stars enjoy coffee and have to pump gas and, believe it or not, have to eat--just like us normal people. Needless to say, she hit the jackpot and spawned an industry that considers an exclusive picture of a celebrity pregnancy worth 5 or 6 figures.
As a result, little cults of “paps” have popped up and begun literally stalking stars for an opportunity to get a shot of--well, anything. These men, recruited from pizza delivery chains and valet parking services, are armed with telephoto lenses and digital cameras and responsible for hunting down celebrities no matter the cost. We, the public, just look on as car crashes and physical altercations take place as a consequence of the reckless behavior of these paparazzi. The so-called photographers will do anything, including a practice known as “door-stepping”, which involves waiting outside the entrance to a celebrity’s home for 12 or 14 hours, just hoping for a shot of anything at all.
And what do we do? We buy into it. The industry only survives because we, the public, suck up every piece of trash they dish out to us. These masters of mindless destruction are counting on us to soak up these ridiculous photos and the nonsensical captions attached. We help to perpetuate the cycle and are thus aiding in the destruction of human lives like that of Britney Spears. While we complain and grimace at the behaviors of both the star and the paps, we continue to fuel the fire. So why would they stop?
So I pose the question: who is the villain? The mentally ill Spears who thrives on the attention, sometimes going so far as to help stage photos (a practice also enjoyed by stars like Paris Hilton-go figure)? The insensitive paparazzi who risk the lives of others for a shot of her picking her nose or showing her private parts? Or the readers who continue to buy the product?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
