Chapter 4

The book points out a recurring theme about mass media: "Older media forms do not generally disappear when confronted by newer forms. Instead, they adapt" (124). We see it all the time, from recorded music to radio, radio to TV, and on and on. Radio is now even taking a big hit from iPods, and satellite stations. So, how do they adapt? They come up with things such as HD radio. High definition radios that allow you to not only hear your favorite stations more clearly, but also allow you to find stations you never could. This is how the world is, when we are faced with diversity we adapt and live on. Even though radio can annoy me sometimes with commercials, there is really no substitute to listening to radio. Music just sounds better on the radio in my opinion, plus it plays everything, and new music that I don't have yet as well.

          With radio being one of the most used mass media, it attracts a lot of interest from many different groups. “…advertisers, who want to reach people in and out of their homes; for record labels, who want their songs played; and for radio station owners, who want to create large radio groups to dominate multiple markets” (136). I’ve noticed that lately ads have been more and more creative. They have to be because with listeners having more and more options, such as iPods and satellite radio. Instead of just a regular old ad about satisfied customers it’s more fun. I can remember one when a mom is stuck in traffic and her kid is in the back seat acting like a GPS telling her to go to a water park. It uses great imagery and a bit of comedy, everything that Americans love.  is also the problem with payola. Record companies will give money or other gifts to record companies to play their music. Payola is unfair to independent or small record companies because they cannot pay like bigger companies can. Thus it is illegal, and it should be.

It’s interesting to read about the Golden Age of Radio and see what people used to do instead of watch the programs we watch today. It was actually quite similar if you think about it. On page 121, where it talks about early radio programming, it notes shows like Amos n Andy, and The Lone Ranger. What interests me more is the quiz shows that were on in the 1930’s. Those kind of shows are prime time shows nowadays. You see shows like Deal or No Deal, 1 vs. 100 and Minute to Win It. They say that culture is cyclical, and now that you see these shows coming back maybe “they” are right.

Chapter 3

   I think radiohead may have unintentionally stumbled onto a great idea for the music business. I have not heard about their album that was available for download at any price online like the book says on page 71, but I think it might just be a great idea. Personally, I like to actually have the cd itself when I buy an album by one of my artists, or bands. So maybe the music business should adopt and adapt this "business model" that was not meant to be a business model. Adapt it by making it possible for music lovers to not only download but maybe order the physical cd for less. Sure they would be losing money, but they are already losing a ton of money through the whole music downloading crisis. It seems the music industry has gone through a loss in sales before. On page 76 it talks about how record sales went down when the audiotape was created. It permitted "home dubbing" or a way for consumers to "copy their favorite records onto tape or record songs from the radio". Sound familiar? Well the music industry escaped that issue by incorporating the compact disc (cd). So, my guess is someone will figure out a way to make the music industry more money once again. One way or another music downloading will become a thing of the past.
   It's cool to read about the past and how rock and roll came to be and all that, but what really caught my eye was the section on hip hop, because I feel that this is the here and now. Hip hop has definitely changed to a more acceptable state. I say acceptable because when it first came onto the scene, similar to rock and roll and any other music style for that matter, it was very controversial particularly with claims that it brought on violence. The book on page 94 talks about the shooting deaths of both Tupac Shakur and Christopher Wallace AKA the Notorious B.I.G. In these cases it does seem like hip hop, more specifically rap, brought about violence. It seems ridiculous too, because think about it those gangs were fighting over which side of the United States you lived on. It was west coast this, and east coast that. I can't believe two of the most vocally talented rappers had to suffer because of such stupid things. But that's for a whole different conversation. The book then goes on to say on page 95 that hip hop nowadays has been going "away from gangster rap to a more danceable hip-hop that combined singing and rapping with musical elements of rock and soul." I think this is a huge step for hip-hop because without it moving away from gangster rap, I don't think it would be as mainstream as it is now.
   The last thing that caught my attention was the paragraph about how music has been promoted on the internet. I was surprised that singer-songwriter Colbie Caillat actually started her career because of myspace. It's a pretty cool concept to think about. I also know that people on youtube get movie deals and a bunch sponsors and other things like that. I'm pretty sure that Justin Bieber actually started out by making videos of himself singing. It's pretty cool to think about that. It opens up so much more opportunity. Just think of the things you can do on the internet now. Not only myspace but groups who are not signed can "list shows, news, tours, photos, downloadable songs, and locations where fans can buy albums" (102). The possibilities to what you can do and what you can become by posting yourself and your talents on the internet are endless.
  

Chapter 2

   In chapter 2, learning about the origins of the internet was pretty fun for me. Of course being a typical teenager I am almost always on the internet for something. Looking at page 49  it was interesting to see that some of the basic ideas put out in mosaic, "the first window based browser", are still used a lot today. Such as the back, forward, home and bookmark buttons. Every internet browser I have com across, Internet Explorer, Firefox, google chrome, all have those buttons still today. Web 1.0 as it has come to be called seems to of set the stage for internet as we know it today. It also established web browsing and e-mail. I remember getting my first e-mail account, it was an AOL account and I was so happy. Even though the only "friends" I had were my family members I would still go on constantly to see what I could do with my limited AOL kids account. Turns out it wasn't very much, but I didn't care I was on the Net. With regards to web 2.0, it is the main reason that we as college kids are writing blogs to help us learn, instead of the old fashioned writing essays and whatnot. It is has basically taken over the life's of almost everyone I know. All I ever hear anymore is about people on facebook, blogging, and even playing video games online. Not just on the computer but also the convergence of video game systems going on the internet. And why wouldn't they? It's a whole new gaming experience for gamers. There are even games out there that only have online features. For games like Call of Duty, and Madden it offers  gamers more bang for their buck. Instead of just playing the game for a week, beating the campaign and being done with it, now you can go online and play again and again with a new experience every time. Web 3.0 blows my mind. I can't even think of a way for the internet to get better than it already is, but you never say never.

    I remember from my senior, between naps, in economics hearing about Microsoft's near-monopolistic ways in the 1990's. Microsoft started "integrating its Windows software with its Internet Explorer Web browser" (pg 55 under "Dividing up the Web) which made their web browser the most used by consumers, basically setting up a monopoly in the process. Now was it a monopoly? My 12th grade economics teacher said so, and he kind of scared me so I'm going to go with it was. Also Microsoft was hit with some serious fines and told to share "interoperability information with other software makers" (pg 56). I also recognized how much AOL has dwindled over the past decade. When my family switched from AOL to high speed internet it was awesome. No more having to wait for the page to load up, no more blocking the phone line, and especially no more of that awful noise the computer made whenever you wanted to go online. It did surprise me though that AOL still has the 4th largest amount of monthly visitors to their sites (chart on top of pg 56). Google's numbers did not surprise me at all. I just wonder how long it will take for somebody to challenge google in some way. It seems like google is growing more and more everyday. My phone even runs on a google based network. What's next? Banking? I'm of course being sarcastic but you get my point.

   When I came across the section on internet security I started to think about what the government does and doesn't track. On page 60 under the government suveillance section it states the "USA PATRIOT Act...grants sweeping powers...to intercept individuals' online communications...intended to allow the government to more easily uncover and track potential terrorists and terrorist organizations". I mean they could be tracking anything and anybody. Is that right? I think so. I think that whatever they need to do to keep us all safe they should be able to do. There is always the question of what is appropriate for being online. I do agree that some things online are inappropriate for some or even most audiences. It seems to be getting a little ridiculous how easily inappropriate material can be accessed. For example, I know that both my brother and I have slipped up when trying to get to the Dick's Sporting Goods website and typed in dicks.com not even thinking about it. Now the only thing that shows up is an authorization page that asks you if you are of age, but still it seems just a little too easy. It's pretty scary when on the internet you can find such things as "bomb building instructions" (bottom of pg 62). It made me think that it would be better if some parts of the internet were government regulated or even just watched over by the government. However, one could argue the other way about where does it end? How much will the government take away? How much will be deemed inappropriate?

Chapter 1

     While reading the first chapter of Media & Culture, I could not help but remember how new age mass media did indeed affect the 2008 election. I remember watching CNN and seeing now-president Barack Obama answering questions from youtube videos sent in from the public. I think it is very interesting how new age media is being worked into such important things as presidential elections. It makes me wonder how future elections will take it a step further. Will americans be able to vote from their living room instead of going to the polls? Will debates consist of two or three way skype calls? Will elections come down to how many facebook friends you have multiplied by your twitter followers? Now I realize these may be some crazy thoughts but I think you understand my point.
     To me the oral and written eras still have a place in todays age. I believe it is more professional and actually easier to communicate with somebody by talking face to face rather than via text or email. I found the question at the bottom of page 6 to be quite interesting when I passed by it. It asks "Do aspects of contemporary culture, such as TV talk shows and anonymous online chat rooms, cheapen public discussion and discourage face-to-face communication?". Basically it is asking if modern media frowns upon oral communication. Personally, I could go either way here. In some ways it actually does discourage face-to-face contact, like Drew Barrymore's character pointed out in "He's just not that into you", nowadays instead of going out and getting a new haircut you update your profile. On the other hand modern media can bring people together like never before. Facebook has helped many people to connect with old friends or meet new people all over the world. So like I said there is still a place for oral and written communication although they are diminishing, they are still here in some way.
     I think that culture as a map is a better metaphor for modern culture than as a skyscraper. However, the skyscraper metaphor does bring up a couple of good points. I definitely do hear every now and then about how popular culture is just not the same as back in the day. The throw-away ethic on page 18 was interesting to me because as I started to read the paragraph I thought about how a new song comes out and then about a month later you hear people saying how old and overplayed the song is. Then when I finished reading I saw that pretty much word for word what I was thinking was in the book! But I digress, back to the map. I like how right off the bat it says how "culture is an ongoing process". Right when I saw that line I could not agree more with what it was saying. Once I got down to the familiar stories paragraph which provided some much needed comic relief for myself, I was hooked on the culture as a map metaphor. I thought about how when I was watching Toy Story 3 this past summer, there was a scene when it seemed the toys were about to be incinerated at the dump and then you're thinking to yourself "wait a minute this is Toy Story that kind of thing doesn't happen" and then they are saved at the last second. It's that feeling of I know what's going to happen but I just don't know how that brings us back again and again to those situations.