Response to Movies: Lucy Calderon

I really enjoyed reading one of Lucy's responses to movies because of how she found a personal connection to the topic.  We learn best when we can connect our lives to a lesson.  I can agree with Lucy that even though we can get movies so many ways through the Internet nowadays, we still find joy in going to the movies.  I think a lot of people can relate to Lucy that we still love going to the movies so much because it is a social experience.  I can also relate to Lucy that going to the movies also serves as a stress reliever from the "outside world".  I think Lucy's point that there are usually no interruptions is what keeps people leaning towards going to the theater.  Lucy did a great job reflecting on this lecture and really made me think what my reasons are for going to the movie theater.
The link to Lucy's response is here

Response to Lights, Camera, Terms: Sydney Tucker

I thought Sydney made some great points that I can relate to.  After learning what the TV News Terminology is I realize that through the local news unit, I have witnessed all those terms.  I agree with Sydney that it is nice that we can now use the professional way to name what is on the new show.  I look back and realize especially the amount of tosses I have seen show after show.  Sydney made a valid point that now that we know the terms, we are more observant for these terminology.  When we are more observant, we are interpreting the news closer and more sufficiently.  I thought Sydney did a well done job explaining what she got out of this lesson.  I lastly have to compliment Sydney for her creative title!
The link to Sydney's post is here

Response to Recorded Music: Cameron Tucker

I really enjoyed reading Cameron Tucker's response to the lecture on recording music.  I have to give her a lot of credit for taking the information we learned and applying it.  After learning about how Internet is demassifing record labels, it never reoccurred to me that famous stars like Justin Beiber were first found on the Internet.  I think that example gives us that big picture to how big the Internet is demassifing record labels.  I think the Internet has made the process of getting your name out there in music a lot easier.  I mean before, you would have to go around many different labels, being lucky and maybe getting a deal whereas now we have YouTube to get people on the spotlight.  I have to agree with Cameron that this specific lecture really made me think how much the Internet is not just affecting record labels, but other mediums.  I hope one day there is a better medium that will demassify the Internet like the Internet is doing to every other medium.  Cameron did a very nice job reflecting on this lecture on recording!

Response to Radio: Piper Hansen

I found Piper Hansen's response to the lecture on radio very interesting.  Piper had a good point that even back then they used radio as a form of advertising.  I just assumed I guess that the annoying advertisements on the radio were kind of a new thing like in the past 20 years or so.  I remember when Mr. Miller told us that KDKA was the oldest radio station, but I didn't reflect on it that much.  I liked how Piper went out of her time to listen to the station.  We learn something new everyday, who knew that a station with such a legacy and background would be filled with too much weather and traffic.  I think all stations have too much junk now a days, it is definitely not just KDKA.  Piper Hansen's reflection on radio was very helpful and well written.

The link to Piper's post is here

Response to Movies: Thomas Simmons

Thomas Simmons made some very valid points about the lectures on movies.  I really never thought about how much movies have shaped the economy.  Like Thomas said, the movie industry provides a lot of jobs.  I liked Thomas' example about the movie Hugo.  Movies are so vivid that you feel like you are inside the movie these days, except we know we aren't. In Thomas' example, he talks about how in the movie Hugo, people were watching a movie about a train moving towards the camera leaving the audience thinking they were going to get hit by a train.  Of course the time period in the movie Hugo was a lot earlier than today.  Lastly, I will have to agree with what Thomas said about movie theaters.  We all knew that the Internet was taking over the movie worth but we didn't realize truthfully that with the situations they have, they aren't doing that bad.  I think Thomas did a great job taking the information we learned and connecting it to the real world.
The link to Thomas' post is here

Response to Television is a Waste: Melissa Perello

I thought Melissa Perello's response to the television lecture was very well written.  I agree with her that this specific lecture was not the most interesting compared to the others.  Melissa and I have something in common that we don't find time to watch television during the week, so I think the lecture didn't appeal to us because we couldn't relate to it as much as the other lectures.  I liked Melissa's example on the domino effect of television's impacts.  For example, the shows becoming 24/7 resulted to people watching TV for about 7 hours a day which lead to people staying indoors which can lead to obesity and so forth.  I can go on and on with the domino effect and that is why I thought Melissa's simile was so great.   I liked how Melissa concluded that although the Internet seems to be demassifing everything, the Internet will probably one day demassify?  I wonder what new technology in the future will be the one to do so?  Overall, Melissa did a great job over viewing the lecture and made some good points.
The link to Melissa's post is here

Television

 Television is so important to the everyday days lives of Americans.  I learned from this lecture that on average, Americans spend 7 hours a day watching TV.  I can not relate to this because I don't watch TV during the week.  I liked this lecture but I did not think it was as interesting compared to the other mass mediums.  I think it is because I knew most of information prior to this topic.  We have watched so much TV in our lifetime that I have seen most of television's impacts.  Although, I really liked the discussion on the impact of politics on TV.  Everyone can agree that they have seen hundreds of Matt Bevin and Jack Conway commercials.  I knew it was to get attention, but I liked getting to know more information of the dos and the don'ts of political ads.  For example, a strategy might be to have a lot of mean ads making people not want to vote, resulting in one side having more "no matter what" followers to vote still.   I agree that most of the issues, shows "try to project" are not helping the issues because they fluff them up too much.  As I said before, to me this lecture was not as interesting as the others but that is just my opinion.  I wish we could have gotten into the history of the first shows, but overall this lesson was insightful.                  

Movies

Movies to me will never go out of style.  I still get super excited to go to the movies literally every time.  It is the big screen, popcorn, candy, loud sound effects, and my friends by my side that make all my movie experiences memorable.  I think it is cool how movies go all the way back to 1888 with the little series of moving pictures!  Ha, look how far we have come in 125 years! I bet never in a million years did people back then think that today we would be able to have movies look like they are popping off the screen (3D).  I agree that movies are a big part of our culture.  I remember the first year the Hunger Games came out, the number of Kaitniss' I saw at Halloween was ridiculous. Also, I remember when my cousin from Argentina asked me the other week if American high schools were really mean, especially the girls.  I replied that no, I haven't been slammed into a locker once and that I don't wear pink on Wednesdays because my cousin had seen mean girls. ;) That is an example of how movies spread identity throughout the world.  Like every other mass medium, movies have demassified thanks to the popular Internet.  We can watch movies where ever, when ever we want.  Truthfully, I watch more movies at theater than at my home because I enjoy seeing a movie right when it comes out and I like the immersive experience.  This was my favorite lecture thus far because I love movies so much and enjoy hearing some background information on them.

Radio

Everyday on the way to school, I am either listening to music or news on the radio.  I liked listening to this topic because radio is apart of my everyday life.  I have to thank the very smart person who created the radio, Telsa but Fessenden for making radio a mass medium.  Instead of radio just being a way to share music, it became a way to invest millions of people.  The radio served as a watchdog to citizens, it was a way to be entertained by fiction, or comedy, etc.  I really liked how I was taught that every medium has a phase where it steadily increases, then rapidly increases then plateaus and finally steadily decreases.  Radio steadily increased in the 1920s but its period when it rapidly increased was the Golden Age during the 1930s.  I believe radio was so popular because people were depressed from the war and Great Depression that they loved to smile and laugh at the radio.  Of course though, every glory comes to an end.  In this case, a fascinating TV was sold and the more TVs sold, the less radios.  TV could do everything radio could do, but music.  Music is what has kept radios going.  Now a days, I think radios are most popular in cars than a radio in the house.  However, I think Internet is demassifing radio too because we now have Spotify and Pandora.  Instead of listening to annoying people ramble on the radio more than you hear music, you can pick which every song you wish.  I really like how we are learning about the history of technology because my generation has grown up to technology.  I feel when I can relate to what I am learning, I am more interested.

Recording

After growing open with technology accessible in our hands when ever, it is hard to think that there was a time period without it.  For example, It is hard to think to not be able to listen to your favorite song or record a message to your friend via phone.  I really enjoyed this lecture on the history behind recording because I have never stopped to think, why am I able to hear this message my friend just left for me?!?  I liked how this lecture tied in with music.  Music is something that interests all so when I hear music, I engage my full attention.  Without Edison's, Berliner's, or Maxwell's inventions we would not be able to record sounds.  I feel like the phonograph, gramophone, and microphone are technologies that caused other technologies to be where they are today.  I think those technologies inspired radios, then TVs, then today, Internet.  It is all a domino effect.  What I mean by that is if Edison didn't invent the phonograph, Berliner would not have been inspired to create the gramophone.  Without the invention of the gramophone, music would not have become a mass medium and influenced Maxwell's electronic microphone and gramophone.  I never realized how big the effects were with the recording inventions.  For example, it created a cultural identity.  People would know more about someone from where they lived because they knew what music they listened to...Bluegrass, classical, country, etc.  Overall, I learned a lot just over this small topic.  I learned about some early inventors, music, one of the first technologies all in one lesson. I believe that this lesson is very important because it is a base in history for the other lectures.

News Media Critique

An article titled "Flying brisket whacks women amid beef at barbecue festival" was published on WHAS11's website on September 15, 2015.  Although the article did a mediocre job over-viewing an incident where a man lost his temper and threw a 200 degree slab of meat at women who was sharing a beef cooker with him at a barbecue festival, it has many violations in regards to the 7 yardsticks of journalism.  First, this article is not newsworthy.  A newsworthy article will have a long lasting effect on many people.  The only person this article effects is the injured victim and the guilty culprit.  Secondly, this article lacks explanation.  It fails to conclude what happened to the women after she was hit in the head/neck area.  It leaves the reader questioning how badly injured the victim was and if this incident was blown out of proportion.  Lastly, this article did not have local relevance.  Yes, the festival was in Kentucky, but this incident was a brawl between two people, therefore not affecting the audience or citizens reading the article.  It does not warn the audience because this specific accident is not very common and it does not teach the citizens of the community anything. This article may be a little interesting because of the oddness of the incident, but it is not worthwhile to read; therefore it is a great example to prove how some journalists over exaggerate interesting news rather than making the important news more intriguing. 

The link to this article is here

Reponse to Plagiarism: Ariana

Ariana Moya did an insightful job responding to our first lecture on plagiarism.  Something Ariana said that stood out to me was, "I thought that reviewing plagiarism as our first lesson was definitely useful because it helps refresh our memories and review content we have already covered before but we might have just moved to the back of our heads." What she said made me think of the impact of having this lesson first.  It wakes us up that we are in high school and don't have room for these kind of mistakes.  It made me think that we will be less likely to making the mistake of plagiarism on our assignments if we are taught the expectations of plagiarism before our first assignments are due. Her response was very relatable. Overall, Ariana did a very good job explaining the importance of the lecture on plagiarism!
The link to her response is here

Response to Information vs Entertainment: Melissa Perello

I agree with Melissa's response to the lecture on the binary models, monopoly, and demassification.  Melissa did a great job giving examples in the real world of binary models wich made it easier for me to relate to.  I specifically liked Melissa's comment on elistist-populist, "Populist is what really interested me because this generation is always on the latest trends, always has the newest technology, and always knows which Kardashian got divorced." I agree that our generation will lean towards populist news than elitist news because at times it is to me, more interesting than politics. Also,I couldn't agree more with Melissa on that monopoly was hard to understand and wished we spent more time on a topic like this.  Melissa did a nicely done job on her opinions and explanations of this lecture!
The link to her great response is here

Gutenburg

People always say where would we be if Columbus hadn’t sailed the ocean blue in 1492, but really Columbus wouldn’t have sailed without the concept of standardized maps and global exploration which came from Gutenburg’s invention.  His invention of the metal printing press changed our world and shaped our world into what it is today. 

This had to be my favorite lecture thus far because I never knew where the invention of a printing press came from.  Gutenburg’s printing press wasn’t the first printing press, but it was the first, most useful and effective printing press.  Gutenburg just wanted to make the world an easier place and help the lives of others. 

I agree that if it wasn’t for Gothenburg’s metal printing press, we wouldn’t be where were today.  Our literacy rate would be A LOT lower because only the wealthy could afford to read, leaving out the majority of the world.  The printing press shaped languages and helped all afford to read.  We also wouldn’t have standardized maps.  It is hard to explore without a printed guidance.  Therefore, the chances of Columbus finding our nation at the time he did is very rare without Gutenburg.

Gutenburg made books possible which also made journalism possible.  I wouldn’t be sitting in the Journalism and Communication program at DuPont Manual without Gutenburg.  I really liked how we focused on the cause and effects of Gutenburg in this lecture.

Binary Models, Monopoly, and Demassification Lecture

This lecture to me was both easy and confusing.  What I mean by that, is that to me, most of the binary models were very simple to understand but I stumbled upon a communication process during this lecture.  The binary model, hot-cold, was very easy to comprehend and I understood elitist-populist well.  I could differentiate elitist as a purpose to inform, whereas populist is only in it for the money and to get the most viewers.  I felt like elitist-populist connected to information-entertainment. I have grown up in a generation where we are trampled by “news” on the latest Hollywood breakup which is a populist company using “entertainment news” instead of news that we could really be educated by elitist companies. 

Things then got a little complicated…Content-distribution boggled my brain.  Personally, I could only tell you what content-distribution is by memorizing a model we were given and tell you that companies make money on advertisement, sponsors, donations, etc. I felt that we needed to spend more time on this concept.  I particularly didn’t understand how the process connected and what part of the company is content and which distribution is.

I also wasn’t very confident on my knowledge of monopoly.  All I could tell you is that vertical monopoly is legal and horizontal monopoly is illegal.  I do know, though, that horizontal is illegal because it eliminates all of their competitors. 

I thought it was very interesting when we talked about niches.  It explains why there are cooking magazines for people who have an interest in food and a sports magazine for people who are interesting in athletics.  It creates a fan base for each niche that companies rely on or they will lose audience, talent, and advertisement…therefore, demassify.   There goes another fad! Remember silly bands or wheelies?!?

Overall, I thought that the concept of binary models is very important to communication, and I look forward to answering all my questions so I am more confident on this matter.

Mass Communication

I thought that this lecture was a very easy concept.  If you are sitting, watching and experiencing a live show… that is group communication.  If you are watching television for example…that is mass communication. To me, I saw a connection to primary and secondary sources.  If you were there to experience it, get a message and give immediate feedback, it is group communication which is like a primary source.   Mass communication isn’t as closely related to these example of sources but it could be like secondary sources because you weren’t there to experience it live and the communication has traveled over time and space.

I really liked the model we were given in class.  I am a visual learner so seeing a model makes me grasp onto the content better.  However, I was a bit confused on the difference between decoding and internalization.  I feel as if decoding and internalization are very similar and hard to distinguish which one of these processes is the one where we interpret the information.  Decoding is when the conversion has happened and it means to solve or interpret, but isn’t internalization also when we interpret the information that stays in our brain? I believe the only difference is that internalization is when the information is planted into our brain. 

I thought the easiest information to learn during this lecture was when we discussed filters and impediments.  To me, it is easiest for me to differentiate the two by thinking of filters as distractions and impediments as disruptions.  I realize that these filters and impediments surround us and are bad because they catch us off guard from our internalization.

Journalists use mass communication.  I believe it is better that journalists' articles are not provided in a “live way” (if that is possible) because immediate feedback is not always positive and good.  Overall, I really enjoyed this lecture and found it interesting. 

Plagiarism

This lecture was not as necessary to me as it might have been to others because I have learned about plagiarism year after year at my old school.  I do agree that plagiarism is bad and that this lecture is important for students to understand what it is and what its consequences are. 

Plagiarism can get confusing at times though.  What I have learned through writing many research papers in the past is if the information is not yours, CITE it.  It is your preference whether to paraphrase or quote it but either way, CITE it. 

I liked how in this discussion we were given the consequences because personally I would not like to spend my Saturday picking up sand with a teaspoon.  One of the tricky things about plagiarism is that sometimes students are unaware that they have committed it which can be bad and emotionally hard for the student. 

I believe that most students of DuPont Manual are individually motivated and strive to learn every day.  Hopefully, with such hardworking personalities, they will make the right choices and lean towards their own words and ideas. 

This lecture may not have been the most intriguing lesson, but it is one of the most useful and important lectures!