The Role I Choose for the Future

The biggest thing I learned from this course is that discrimination, hatred, oppression, etc, exist largely from a lack of knowledge and experiences. When I leave this classroom, my role is going to be that of a student and a teacher.


There are many things I have never experienced and might not ever get to. I can, however, make the effort to learn about those things. Even if I can't understand certain people or situations that are different, I can be aware and accepting of them. That awareness will help me to be more open-minded and less judgmental.

In the same way, I hope to use my voice and my talents to educate others. I can use the media tools of the time to open up new worlds to others. I can help provide that knowledge and awareness, which will hopefully lead to more acceptance of differences.

As difficult as it was to nail down the definition of a sociological imagination, I realize that it's something I've always used and something I hope to continue to use. I want to apply that to every situation where I find myself judging someone else. What must their life be like? How did they grow up? Where did they grow up? Etc... We are all connected to the societies in which we were raised. Being aware that these upbringings are different, but okay, can lead to more understanding.

Lippman vs Dewey

“Knowledge must come not from the conscious but from the environment.”

Walter Lippman doesn’t think we have much control over our own thoughts. In Public Opinion, he proposes that we need an elite group of experts to make the big decisions for us. He thinks that the common person’s reason isn’t developed and cannot be acted on. His views on democracy are dark and do not offer much hope for the future.

Lippman is clearly a believer of agenda setting. He thinks that a higher power (like the media) decides what we think about. I do not believe in the agenda setting theory for many reasons. First of all, it’s ridiculous to think that one specific group of people can or should make decisions for the masses. It’s true that our government is a small group making decisions for the entire country, but not only do we elect them, but we have the power to tell them what we want. I am a firm believer in democracy and I feel that I have power to make a difference and to be heard. Secondly, I think that the internet and citizen journalism are proof that the people will be heard and can decide for themselves what’s important. We’re seeing an increase in citizen involvement in news and entertainment coverage. What would Walter Lippman say to this? I think he’d be at a loss for words, which is saying something for him.

I believe more in what John Dewey says. He’s more positive about democracy and public participation. Most of all, he focuses on communication. While Lippman implies that we should just sit back and let the elite discuss things and make decisions for us, Dewey believes that we should all participate in the discussion. He would probably believe more in the uses and gratification theory.

I definitely think like Dewey, but I believe it’s important to study Lippman as well. He has valuable points that challenge the way that I think. Studying his side helped me form my opinion on the subject and made me think about how I use my voice and how I can use it more.

"Reality is merely an illusion..." -Albert Einstein

When you watch TV, do you become totally immersed in the characters and lose yourself in the storyline? You may be experiencing a hyper-reality. Jean Baudrillard is a theorist who came up with hyper-reality. He defines it as “The simulation of something which never really existed.” So the question is: Does watching television create our reality, or is it just an outside source of entertainment?

To test this theory, I had to watch a full night of television. And honestly, it’s painful these days. There is only one single show that keeps me almost sitting still for an hour: America’s Next Top Model. I don’t think this makes a false reality for me because I don’t watch it thinking that those girls are representing everyone. If I wasn’t experiencing these situations on the show, I’d be experiencing them in a magazine or someplace else. No false reality here.

Next up was Sopranos. Okay, this one might construct a bit of a hyper-reality. I tend to have a stronger New Jersey accent afterwards and I tend to say I’m going to “whack” people. (DISCLAIMER: I would never actually do such a thing. It’s just a joke.) Even though I do hail from the fabulous Garden State, I’m not regularly exposed to mobsters (although my new neighbor is seriously shady). I do think that if you watch hours upon hours of The Sopranos, you might start to believe the sensationalized life of a mobster is real life. But then again…is it false?

Finally, I rounded out my night with some classic King of Queens. You can’t beat this show. It’s funny and sweet and, I think, quite real. The situations are obviously dramatized for effect, but most of them are very possible. I just realized that this is another show I love that’s based in New Jersey. I am consistently exposed to working class people and NYC commuters in real life. Again, no hyper-reality here!

I believe I can see the difference between reality and hyper-reality. I should point out, though, that a show like The Sopranos does twist some people’s views of certain groups of people (here, Italian Americans in New Jersey). Perhaps other people find themselves in a hyper-reality when watching these shows. I feel that I think about the bigger picture enough to realize the difference.

I could see evidence for and against Meyrowitz’s view that television brings people closer together. With the Sopranos, it brings together those New Jersians who can laugh at the depictions. But it also breaks some apart because they get so angry over the stereotypes.

Lippman might say that these shows create pictures in our heads about these groups of people. I think that being aware of this makes me challenge those pictures.

Rate It!

This week we’re looking at Nielson ratings for our favorite shows. I had trouble finding the ratings for my actual favs, so I’m choosing a game show: Deal or No Deal. Howie Mandel’s beautiful baldness appears every Monday night at 8 on NBC.

For the week of March 19-25, Deal or No Deal tied 10th among the top 20 network primetime series. Here are the details:

Deal or No Deal is in a competitive time slot, but it fairs well. It’s up against the 4th rated show, Dancing with the Stars on ABC, which it hasn’t surpassed. The other shows in that time slot, like Fox’s Prison Break and CBS’s How I Met Your Mother, don’t offer all that much competition. I think it’s in a good time slot for the type of show that it is.

I don’t think it would work as well if it were moved to a later time slot on any day because a lot of the heavy weights, like Grey’s Anatomy, and the CSI’s are after 8pm. If it had to move to another night, Tuesday and Wednesday could be tricky because nothing wants to go against American Idol. Thursday nights have Ugly Betty, so that could be another tricky night. It could probably handle the competition on Friday nights, but Monday night is a much better TV game show night.

Basically, Deal or No Deal is in the best time slot for itself. It’s definitely a competitive show, especially for being a game show.

The Labyrinth

"Where everythings seems possible and nothing is what it seems..."

Before we visited Harry Potter at Hogwarts...before Frodo took us on a magical journey in Lord of the Rings...there was... The Labyrinth.

(Trailer for The Labyrinth)

This 1986 movie combines the skills of Jim Henson and George Lucas to create the tale of a fanciful world that could rival that of the popular fantasy films of today. The movie stars a young Jennifer Connolly who makes a wish that sends her baby brother into the hands of the Goblin King, played by David Bowie. To get him back, she must make her way through the labyrinth to the castle. Along the way she meets all sorts of creatures, some who help her and some who threaten her. She must use her mind and her heart to make it all the way through the maze to save her little brother.

There are many reasons that The Labyrinth is a must-see. The strongest part of the movie has to be the amazing puppetry and special effects, especially considering it was made in the 80s. There seems to be much more detail and care put into it than the computer animated graphics we’re used to today. Jim Henson really shows off his genius in this one. The characters are Muppets, but most of them are much scarier than what we’re used to from him. The movie was nominated for awards because of the amazing visual effects.

Another reason to see this film: David Bowie. If you think you’ve seen him at his best, think again! Woven into the movie, we have various musical interludes which contribute to a catchy soundtrack. His tight pants, heavy eye shadow, and platinum blonde fro/mullet hair will leave you wondering why 80’s fashions ever went out of style.

The Labyrinth keeps you glued to the screen. Every time Sarah takes a turn in the maze, she meets new, interesting creatures with different tasks and powers. Henson and Lucas thought of the most amazing characters that most people would never even dream of. At the end of the movie, you just want Sarah to continue to explore the labyrinth so we can meet more magical creatures. You will be completely immersed in the tale.

The Labyrinth is one of those movies that will take you away from reality. If you have any sense of humor, The Labyrinth will turn around any bad day. It’s a great escape from the computer generated images we’re used to today. It will remind you of a simpler time when movies were more tangible. It’s a little known treasure that you definitely should discover.

Crash is a Smash

“You think you know who you are? You have no idea.”

In the 2004 movie Crash, Officer John Ryan says this to his partner Officer Tom Hansen. Ryan knows Hansen accused him of being a racist. Hansen thinks he’s above racism—but he soon finds out that Ryan is in fact right. He doesn’t know himself like he thought he did.

Paul Haggis’ Best Picture winner, Crash, is an intense movie that follows a group of colorful characters through a turbulent 36 hour period. The movie has several different storylines that Haggis weaves together perfectly. Each of these story lines teaches us something about racism.

We meet Rick and Jean Cabot (played by Bredan Fraiser and Sandra Bullock), the LA District Attorney and his wife. While Rick tries to base his campaign as being as “non-racist” as possible, Jean lives a lonely life, unsure of who she can really trust.

There’s Officer Ryan and Officer Hansen (Matt Dillon and Ryan Phillippe), who both struggle with their racist beliefs. Hansen is new to the LAPD and thinks he has his ideals in check. Ryan, though, quickly teaches him that he does not know himself yet.

We meet Farhad (Shaun Toub) who deals with stereotypes against his middle eastern background everyday. He is ironically full of stereotypical beliefs himself, which eventually lead to take tragic action against an innocent father and husband.

All of these characters and many more are strikingly different on the outside, but deeply similar on the inside. They all deal with issues of racism and lonliness, stereotypes and hate. No one knows who they can trust, but they are all connected in random day to day business which forces them to cross each others paths—or crash into each other.

If Walter Lippman were to watch this movie, he would have a lot to say about the issues of stereotypes. His description of stereotypes in his text Public Opinion says “they are an ordered, more or less consistent picture of the world, to which our habits, our tastes, our capacities, our comforts and our hopes have adjusted themselves.” They are a sort of defense that keeps our lives going. For example, in the movie we see Sandra Bullock’s character held at gunpoint by two African Americans. Afterwards, she regrets not having followed her instincts because the stereotype she knew of African Americans made her afraid of the two who eventually stole her car. She and other characters use the stereotypes and the pictures in their heads as a defense mechanism to not have to deal with the world as it is.

This award winning movie is a must-see for everyone. It brings up topics that are often never spoken about, such as racism in law enforcement and our own uncomfortable feelings with people who are different from us. It forces conversation and discussion on topics that are often taboo. Paul Haggis has created a masterful piece that deserves all the awards and attention it received. It definitely deserves a ten out of ten stars.

Philo vs RCA

It sounds like the storyline from a movie.

The hard working, slightly awkward, all American boy discovers something great and hopes to spread it to the world.

Then along comes the evil Russian who steals his idea and claims it as his own.

Unfortunately, the ending isn’t as happy as one might like.

Philo T. Farnsworth is the hard working American in this storyline and Vladimir Zworykin is the evil Russian. These days, few people know that Philo T. Farnsworth is the creator of the television. Why? Because big business won.

There are similar themes between the Farnsworth story and situations we’re learning about in this cluster. Philo is the subordinate group with no power. Even though he had the knowledge, he did not have the money which, in this situation meant power. RCA dominated him because it was a powerful corporation.

We could also see Philo as the minority group and RCA as the majority. Philo did not have enough pull as a single person, while RCA had many members and lots of influence. Philo was not strong enough as a single person to own the design of the television. RCA, however, was.

More specifically, let’s compare the Philo storyline to The Bluest Eye. Philo would represent the African American characters. No matter how hard they tried, they were always at the mercy of the white majority. They were just as capable, but didn’t have the status to pull themselves out from the bottom. It’s a classic case of little guy/big guy. And the big guy won.