In The Name of The Lord, Eloi Yahweh, I am coming!

Just another WordPress.com site

The image means the inverse even in what is said!

on December 7, 2012

 

1)             a) http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/05/15699308-60-wounded-in-clashes-between-egypt-presidents-supporters-and-opposition-protesters?lite

60 wounded in clashes between Egypt president’s supporters and opposition protesters

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/05/15706380-syria-loads-chemical-weapons-into-bombs-military-awaits-assads-order?lite

Syria loads chemical weapons into bombs; military awaits Assad’s order

            The first Egypt case presented a man wounded and bleeding and the citizens fighting one another.  It was not so terrifying and it was not so dramatic.  People are presenting the facts, in this case NBC did according to me a good job, not so on the second one.  Checking around Hillary Clinton mentioned the issue and not only Clinton but Obama were trying to threat the President of Syria not to use the bombs as Saddam Hussein did back in 1988 and apparently they were showing the death body of the people that he did kill not the ones that Syria is supposed to kill this time, but without saying so it is misleading.  The images apparently were presented to illustrate the issue, but it seems to be out of place and dumb on one hand.  On the other hand and trying to include what is written by Arielle Emmett’s article: “Too Graphic?” in which “Valerie Payen-Jean Baptiste, a Haitian elementary school principal”

            In one hand, the writer believes they should present the few mages selected to illustrate the extent of the catastrophic earthquake and they argued that they are delivering what people want.  On the other hand, the people, like in this case Ms. Payen-Jean Baptiste felt as I would feel and good majority of people do.  Going a bit further and if we put together what is written by Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct found on page 175 in the same book, NBC should highlight that the images were not part the actual article in the case of Syria and certainly what Emmett wrote is applicable to the Haiti’s case in which the images were brutal, were reviving the suffering of hundreds of thousands of people who not only suffered through the earthquake, but many other catastrophes.  

            Now going a bit further and trying to use the word quoted by Emmett in regards Washington Post editor, Bonnie Jo Mount who said “Were are in a culture that censors visuals very heavily.  I think that sometimes works to our detriment because we don’t run visuals that people need to see.”  But what I will say in this regards is just apply the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct found on page 175 and you will be working in between the line of what is acceptable.  Like for example, I will repeat for NBC DO NOT PRESENT IMAGES OR SOUNDS THAT ARE REENACTED WITHOUT INFORMING THE PUBLIC and in regards Emmett article she is totally right because once again if you apply the same code of ethics you will read in regards to fairness as written on page 175 “Exercise special care when children are involved in a story and give children greater privacy protection than adults.” Haiti issues involved the whole community and country and the images were so bad that Leoni Hermantin was quoted saying “some images did go too far and showed no respect for the dead,” she also acknowledge that “You can take whatever shot you want, because the people are poor and the government never reacts with outrage when these images are displayed.” Hermantin in short, ended up blaming the editors and saying that they “should think they are not dealing with animals, but with people who care very much about dying with dignity.  People from Haiti want to be buried clothed.”  Hermantin and Emmett did not welcome those images, as millions of other people around the world.  Absolutely everything has a limit.

1)    b) Deborah Lynn Jaramillo in her article “The Spectacle of War,” wrote, “Like high concept films, television news is a commercial enterprise that is expected to turn a profit, and in the last thirty years, television news has absorbed the entertainment-driven commercial imperatives of its owners.” As quoted by (Bagdikian 2000; McCesney 1999; Thussu 2003; Whittebols 2004).  Jaramillo then concluded, “As a result, television news, like the film industry, conveys structural and ideological support for the system that enables it to prosper as written by (Halin 1986b; McNair 1998).  

She established that this is a or “The formula product of old school, U. S. –style propaganda and has been used repeatedly in mass-marketed blockbusters.” And she keeps on going saying “Part of the power of news programming lies in its ability to construct very specific ways of seeing and hearing the world in conflict.  In that sense, was coverage on television operates no differently than everyday news and she visual it as the ‘daily textbook for most Americans on what is happening in the world.’ – the news, what might affect, what might give us more opportunities or what can make drastic changes in our life for good or for worse, but according to Jaramillo “To divorce televised war coverage from the entertainment industry is to decontextualize it in the most fundamental way.” And keeps on going saying: -“A film making practice inextricably linked to media conglomeration, new technologies, and an incessant self-preserving drive to market.  When infused with critical theory, high concept is a valuable way to understand the politics of entertainment-driven war coverage.”

            In short, film and news linked to media conglomeration, and as he wrote “The difference between the construction of news and the construction of films is that new ideally provides information that is essential to democracy.  A healthy news system contributes to an informed citizenry,” and both are supposed to produce profit as written above.

            Jaramillo wrote “The connection between documentary material such as news footage and realities such as war and death is unstable and subjective.”  They are the way of perceiving the world that are based on a mediate through images and sounds chosen on the criteria or interpretation of the individual or the group making profit. On the beginning of the war there is no advertisement run or hardly any to stress to the audience the crucial reality. But by the third day become standard and the story of the war (complete with stars, characters, genres, and narrative trajectories) has emerged with clear narrators and the spectacle to support it.

            For Guy Debord (1967), “spectacle is a catchall term for the mode of production as well as the product; it is capitalism, hegemony and entertainment.  The spectacle is “the existing orders uninterrupted dialogue about itself” (24).  Debord characterizes the process of creating spectacle as the imposition of certain viewpoints and perceptions upon the populace through the process of mediation (18). Spectacle includes everything involved in the creation of the unreal in order to mask real, lived experiences and cloud perception.

            According to Giroux after the September 11 we do have “spectacle of terrorism” that mark the departure from a preoccupation with consumerism and signal the foremost concerns because “Different social formations produce spectacles unique to particular historical periods.” And the early twenty-first century situates us within “social relations constructed around fear and terror.”

            Through films we discovered (Early Soviet filmmakers sought to manipulate reality and emotion through editing) and as a result, the connection between television news and reality is problematic and sometimes disastrous. Douglas Kellner (2005) notes the changes in war coverage since 1991.  The “live” war coverage is the descendant of war documentaries shots on film by another type of embedded observer.   In WWII, the German army assigned one cameraman to every platoon and the Propaganda Company sorted and filtered information (Virilio 1989, 56).

            The Western Allies also had what Virilio calls “cine commando units” and similarly the Soviet Union because film is probably the most compelling tool of persuasion and propaganda during wartime.   Leni Riefenstahl, whose state-supported film Triumph of the Will (1935) is the quintessential cinematic document of the Third Reich, yet the U. S. government and military engaged with the Hollywood film industry to achieve similar propagandistic aims.  The results are also catastrophic not only for government, but for the media when failure occurs like in Vietnam War that ended up as a syndrome.

            This affected a lot the relation and fear to critical stopped access to battlefields until recently when the United States attacked Afghanistan after September 11, 2001, if “they followed the rules,” which prohibited independent travel and interviews off the record and mandated security reviews of reports (185).  In between propaganda and converging interests lies consensus and nationalism.

            Edward Said writes that the complexity and diversity of the United States demands that the media construct “a more or less standardized common culture.” He qualifies the result of this rhetoric as “the illusion, if not always the actuality, of consensus,” and according to him the media belong to “this essentially nationalist consensus” and operate in its service. Right now many factors are taking place like media conglomeration.

            “However, according to Brian McNair, the owner of “lucrative capitalist enterprises” like media conglomerates “understandable . . . use their media to support [capitalist] economies and to preserve socio-political systems which allow them to go on generating profits” (1998, 103).  Daya Kishan Thussu said “the television news has become more infotainment” (2003, 122). (p. 63).   CNN and Fox News Channel plainly used coverage of the 2003 war to advance their commercial aims by adhering closely to the war’s marketable concept incorporating the style of advertisements to promote their war coverage as well as advertised network-produced merchandise, which tied into and helped promote the marketable concept of the war.”

2) http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2012/12/05/mcafee-founder-on-run-in-murder-case-arrested-for-entering-guatemala-illegally/?intcmp=obinsite

Ellen DeGeneres Christmas commercial upsets One Million Moms.  I do not know what really is true or what is a manipulation of the issue by the media or the party interested on putting Degeneres out of the picture just because they do not want gays or lesbians in public places showing that they are as any other human acceptable individuals: lovable, responsible, hard workers, but the political involvement and success of this people is bothering the system who do not want to have no one else than them saying what they please and as they please without anyone with a respectable image and for me no matter if it is gay, lesbian or straight, but individuals who are professionals, who have ethics, principles, and respect for others as they wish to be respected because our rights end where others rights starts.

I watch Fox and NBC News on 12/5 and 6, 2012 and the Egypt and Syria news were there both days, but on the December 6, 2012 I found Degeneres’ issue and the word she used for me wasn’t that bad, but you know my English is a second language and sometimes they are not for me as offensive that might be for others “I know this is no small feat,” many others advertisement for me are very damaging specially the games or the contents described by Reese and Shoemaker in their article Studying influences on Media Content and as they wander Why? On what basis did the newspaper decide to make these changes? In regards to the 1993 The Los Angeles Times revised its “style book,” or as Gary Weaver, an expert in hostage negotiations, compared television coverage of the situation in Waco to a mob on the sidewalk chanting, “jump! Jump!” to someone threating to commit suicide by jumping from a tall building.  “You [television broadcasters] can say you didn’t push [Koresh] and that’s true,” Weaver says. “But on the other hand, you contributed.”

            My question would be based on my experience did the 1,000,000 mothers are really demanding the removal of Degeneres or the 10 or so leaders of the group decided to do so?  I used to work at Stratford and to get the 5stars of high service, the owner used to make me collect the newspapers of all the residents to fill up the form that made them to earn the 5 star acknowledgments as the best place of its kind.  On the other hand, there is a trend against or in favor gays and lesbians right now through the media and I am pro choices.  In short, what this authors are saying it is true “The attitudes and orientations of media workers; professionalism; corporate policies; corporate ownership patterns; the economic environment; advertisers; and ideological influences.

            Now in the case of McAfee, I had seen the building of that firm on 101 going near Paramount Great America, but the whole arrest and political asylum that the man is looking forward to get is not making sense.  Isn’t he from this country and if he isn’t why they do not establish where he is from.  They do have a witness or a reporter that look like an official representative who knows from where because the whole deal is happening between Belize, Guatemala and I guess this country, but half ways.  What is the reality and what it is that is in between the lines.  Again as written by them on p. 205 “The problem, of course, is that there is no such thing as an objective observer of reality.  All of us use our experiences, personalities, and knowledge to interpret what we see.  The best we can do, then, is to compare media reality with social reality-a view of the world that is socially derived; that is, what society knows about itself” (Fishman, 1980) because content mean the complete quantitative and qualitative range of verbal and visual information distributed by the mass media.  Absolutely anything that appears there as written by them.  But mainly is to try to keep in mind one of the basic right that said: my rights end and starts where others happens to be in the same line and purpose so give to others the respect they deserve and try to give what the audience really expect.  The media should be trying hard to present the truth, the facts for them, the people to whom they are serving to judge not with the intention to harm, but to keep a healthy community.

3)  I recalled watching The Read the following link and look for a chance to analyze the content and comment on the ethics of u-tube stories and material.

http://www.infowars.com/you-tube-censors-video-about-global-warming-alarmist-calling-for-skeptics-to-be-treated/

            I also saw the Colbert Report show not only in class, but recently on 11/28 and 12/6/2012 as well as the Jon Stewart show in regards John McCain and Lindsey Graham attack Susan Rice.  I found that those programs seem to be successfully attracting a lot of people and having a high rate.  Nevertheless, and I am not sure how much you are aware about the fake laugh put in the shows or the high rate or the higher number of follower that can be purchase or are sold to inflate the numbers, but they are fake and do not exist.  On 12/6/12 the Jon Stewart show was having four more people trying to entertain the audience and I will say that is a sign for me that this show rate is going down and for obvious reason as followed described:  Don Hewitt according to the 60 Minutes and the News Magazine had been for years successful, but ended a bit sadly for a reason that is written there. 

            I started this question answer copying and pasting the link that you posted because Colbert made a joke of the alienation of the First Amendment as YouTube censored that video and of course I am totally against books ban or censorship on videos because people should have the right that our constitution gives us.  Absolutely anyone has a better or higher standards on no matter and as adult every single citizen of this country should be respected and this do not include our children because they are minors and they do not have the necessary knowledge to discern and their parents, not the school, not the librarians, nor the government, should decide on what they watch or read only their parents because they do know their religious, their culture background and so on and forth and they should be the ones deciding as long as their children are minors.  In short, the censorship created a division between the people in this country and Colbert and the corporation or the interest behind this profitable business is using their advertisements dramatic elements or knowledge’s to work out the issues that are bothering part of the people as the issue is being censor because is harming the profit of those business and no one cares about the main issues in regards the health of the people in this country.  Yes it seems to be they are divided, but let all of them have the same opportunity to decide on it and do not hide it just imposing the view or half of the people.

I will not talk about what it is past and I will basically talk about the show that are in the air as the one that are been host by Stewart and Colbert.  This last one seems to be a bit better than the one host by Stewart.  I feel that in the case of a serious issue like the one in regards the Benghazi this type of show that is making jokes and fun of an issue that for me is serious.  How many Americans feel this way as I do?  For profit the line that traditional separated the newsworthy topics entertaining and the entertaining issues newsworthy got down to very badly jokes to hide or blurry the seriousness of the issues presented either by the people or the few representatives that are trying to make changes or statements.  I am not making statements in particular issues and I just giving my personal observation in general.  For this assignment I am not researching enough to say that John McCain as described above with others were rights or not, but the way that this issues are been presented take the respect that government representatives doing their role properly should respect.  I am one of the people publicly accusing them, but my answer in this assignment is just focusing on the appropriate answer to your question not on what I feel against government in general.

In short, I believe these types of programs are using the elements of advertisements, films and media to control the differences in issues acceptance by the people.  They are manipulating, but at the same time, I feel this is affecting their images.  Through the media news like NBC and Fox I also watch two or three videos in regards Detroit where more than millions of people used to live and now only 700 thousands are living because of the crime rate, the lack of ethics and I feel the lack of coverage’s that the media is not doing to keep healthy society and a healthy country.  It is true they can do what they done through Colbert-Youtube censor as also is happening in regards my own video posted there.  “Sorry they are not available.” Or as it is happening even here at SFSU where I do have a problem opening my final exams just because the crime organized is denying my rights to pursue education and they are discriminating not only against me, but the millions others that like me are struggling to say enough!

4)   Prior to the article in question are the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct that are based on common sense to provide a full range of information to enable the public to make enlightened decisions.  Mike Conway and Jacob Grosheck start presenting a survey data on mass communication student’s perception of plagiarism and fabrication indicate an ethics gap in which students are more concerned about ethical breaches in journalism than in academics. They described the results, the way in which conducted the survey in which 2,925 students of a Midwest State university for six consecutive semesters.  Many of the students were counted twice a semester at the start and again at the end of the course. The beginning of the senior course was temporarily eliminated and the data were analyzed again, with no significant changes to the results, so they were included.  They gave the specific, but the ratios are many and what I will highlight out is that “More than 60% of all respondents felt that journalists should be fired for plagiarizing or fabricating information while less than 5% of students thought that expelling students for similar violations was appropriate. The issues of journalistic plagiarism and fabrication clearly do not resonate as strongly for those students who are not experiencing journalism internships. Now the first page of the article contained what it seems to be an interview (2004) the words used are very strong and viewing the image bother me not knowing who and for what that person deserve it.  Jayson Blair and (New York Times) and Jack Kelley of USA Today and Stephen Glass of the New Republic, but I will keep away from commenting about knowing what I discovered and I had been trying to make public for years, but I am sure that there is God trying to give justice to all who deserve it.  What I will add is that the results from my point of view are acceptable.  Since I started college and in this semester my higher education I had found not correct that students who are been here to learn are punished because they “Plagiarize as they are trying to learn the skills to not do so.”  On the other hand, I had found contradictions; some teachers who are penalizing the students publicly are committing the crime supposedly for a good cause or reasoning and without giving names because it is not worth or necessary.  I do believe a person learns from making errors and if the students are supposed to know how to not plagiarize, they should not be here because they do know.  What is the reason for them to be here?  Aren’t they trying to learn?  Perhaps this is the reason of the contradictive results of the survey done and presented through this article and knowing what I discovered this is just used to kick the poor out of the higher education programs as wicked government is persecuting millions for religious reasons.  Many are talking about privacy, ethics when they do not even know how to spell those big words and they are invading the bodies of other not just plagiarism their knowledge’s, but robbing the talents of the poor people and when I am trying to publicize the abuses that I am suffering just because wicked “think” they are better than others or when they and government representatives are abusing physically, mentally, sexually and psychologically not only me, but my family there everything gets worse.  To be able to respond this final test in your class, many had been abusing me and to open my file (private USB) I have to struggle because they are locking access.

5) a) The 60 minutes program created by Don Hewitt demonstrated that television journalism could be massively profitable.   14 minutes minidramas made reporters as the protagonists capitalizing on and redefining the narrative power of television news.  It made newsworthy topics entertaining, and entertaining issues newsworthy, eventually contributing to a blurring of the line that traditionally had separated the two, expanded the power of broadcasting journalism as introducing effective and dramatic techniques in editing and investigative reporting raising ethical questions in both areas.   

Many were the successful stories presented and Hewitt role was not just the creator, but the pusher of the program for quite sometime.  Barkin in his first page and introduction of the article mentioned not only the 60 Minutes CBS Program, but referred as Hewitt as largely the one man’s energy, imagination, and undeniably, his unrelenting ego who had 50 years experience and this do not differ from Harry Reasoner who called Hewitt “an authentic genius of television news.” He also wrote that Hewitt was considered “smart, maybe brilliant,” but not serious enough. 60 Minute Hewitt’s creation resulted on a program that, at very least, changed television journalism, the model and lessons of 60 Minutes changed and probably are still changing journalism of all kinds everywhere

            Don Hewitt’s program unarguably had introduced the technique to millions of viewers and to more than a generation of television news producers.  The dramatic elements of the story have remained unchanged: plot, character, tone, and theme.   One of the issues of the program were brought up in January 1996, when the Wall Street Journal made everything public in a long story that quoted and named Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, CBS and 60 Minutes both looked weak when confronted with the resources of Big Tobacco.  In 1999, when The Insider began playing in theaters across America, CBS and Wallace looked cowardly.  Hewitt and Berman, who was no longer with CBS, disagree on most of the facts concerning the whole incident, especially on the details of the movie depiction whatever the truth was, it was not a proud moment for anyone at 60 Minutes or at the network.  The famous CBS eye was left more than a bit discolored.

5) b)  It has to do with cultural imperialism through globalization.  Brian McNair said that people in Russia and many other places around the world welcomed at first the United States and received for example Mc Donald as evidence of progress, but as mentioned in the work of Ed Herman, Robert McChesney (1997), U. S. and British media organizations have been viewed as “missionaries of capitalism,” controlling transnational flows of news and other forms of communication to the rest of the world. 

            In the second half of the twentieth century, and especially during the Cold War, the intention and effect of this communicative domination came to be viewed as a cultural imperialism, functional for but distinct from the economic imperialism dissected by Lenin where authentic national cultures, it was argued within the cultural imperialism thesis, were threatened by alien values and beliefs imposed from outside, embodied in global brands such as Coca-Cola, McDonald’s and Disney.  With the support of the United Nations’ cultural agency, UNESCO, and in contradiction to the concept of the new world information order as set out in the McBride Report of 1980,I Anglo-American cultural exports were increasingly viewed as invasive, predatory and destructive of local cultures.  Interpreted by critical media scholars as symptomatic of false consciousness and Anglo-American brainwashing-the product of a cynical seduction of vulnerable populations by transnational media corporations bent on global domination.  Anglo-American news media in particular were attacked for their imperial ideological role, and for interpreting the problems and conflicts of the world from the self-interested perspective of the USA and its allies (Tunstall and Machin, 1999).  In a typical articulation of the cultural imperialism thesis, one writer asserted in the late 1990s that “the cultural product of the international television news agencies serves to perpetuate a western hegemony hostile to developing nations” (Paterson, 1998, p. 95) 

            Resistance to cultural imports from the U. S. or the U. K., or indeed from Australia or Latin America is now more readily acknowledged to have been rarely if ever, an expression of popular opinion so much as, at best, a reflection of local elite anxieties about the loss of control over cultural life, and at worst a excuse for the cover-up of corruption and human rights abuses.  And with “The End of Anglo-American Domination – Al Jazeera” (We are the image means the inverse) It was Al Jazeera’s talk shows and sometimes its reporting which more than any particular pan-Arab politician stirred anti-Americanism in the region, while Qatar built a military base to host the very U. S. /Coalition Central Command that directed the invasion of Iraq.11 Even after Bin Laden had confessed to Al Qaida’s role in the 9/11 (September 11 – According to my discoveries as the only God’s servant: I filed three (3) times federal suit cross-complaint accusing Bush’s Administration – contested several times and was finally dismissed, but San Francisco federal court kept my file and Laden’s family was protected by the criminals in power). Plot, Arab observers conceded, Al Jazeera had sought to absolve Arabs of blame, and instead to scapegoat “Zionism” and U. S. “imperialism.”  And even though the conclusion said that with the evolution of real-time satellite news, the concept of cultural imperialism so crucial to the control paradigm is, if not yet wholly redundant, losing its critical force and I do not agreed with Jean Chalaby who puts it, “The cultural imperialism thesis has too many shortcomings to deal adequately with the complex reality of the contemporary international television market” (2005, ed., p. 9). Make me laugh the closing of the article that said “If CNN or the BBC continue to dominate the global news market in the years and decades to come, it will not be for lack of competition.  In satellite news, as in other NICT sectors such as mobile telephony, the global information gap is narrowing.

References

Ibrahim, D. (2011). Critical Issues In Broadcasting News. In University Readers, Inc. (Comp.), Critical Issues InBroadcasting News (Vol. First, pp. 1-271). Cognella. (Original work published 2011)

Note: Answers to the questions are been giving as written on the text.  This are not exactly my words.

 

Advertisements

One response to “The image means the inverse even in what is said!

  1. PLEASE BE AWARE THAT THIS ARTICLE SHOULD NOT BE POSTED IN MY PAGE AS THIS IS NOT MY ARTICLE. IT SEEMS TO BE A PLAGIARISM OF MY WORDPRESS ACCOUNT USE BY OTHERS AND IT IS TOTALLY DISGUSTING!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: