Just another WordPress.com site

Group meeting

2/11/2010

Today we met up again to discuss what we needed to do. Because we didn’t understand last weeks assignment and couldn’t find it on the blog, we had to catch up and as it turned out, there was actually work on the blog for us to do. The work was for us to do research on a particular topic we found intresting by using the general public. For this, we decided to to work on junk food. The question was weather junk food should be banned. We created a facebook page just for this and got so many response which was very helpful to us in knowing what the public thought. We later on analysed the result and came up with a conclusion on what should be done about junk food and found out the majority of people that ate it.

 For this weeeks assignment, we have to individually pick one item from our cabinet of curiosity and write about the ways our media object can ingfluence the mind of a volnurable audience. After this, we have to then compare it with each member of our group to see what specific  themes and topic emerged the most. We then have to produce our thoughts on the theory and come up with a summary of a debate for next weeks seminar. We have not done that yet, but hope to work on it by the end of this week and hopefully ready for next weeks seminar.

 

26/10/2010

Today we all met up to discuss the development of the blog. As we haven’t met up as a whole group yet, this was a good chance to get to know what we needed to add to it and when. Because we haven’t added anything to it as of yet, we have split up all of the previous tasks and allocated them to individual people to complete within the next few days. This should hopefully get the ball rolling and start it off as a more regular activity.

DO YOU THINK JUNK FOOD SHOULD BE BANNED?

For this work we had to use facebook to find out peoples opinion. We created a group called Junk food should be banned to see the amount of people that were going to join, or leave a comment of their opinion.

We were really impressed to see that there were lot’s of different opinions on this topic, some good and some bad, but the majority of people supported the idea that junk food should be banned, although they all had an individual reason why this should be done. Nowadays, scientists have been trying to do different research on why people easily get fat and most the reason was because of junk food.

Research

Kid, female, eating a burger, junk food, obesity: Junk food creates changes in brain chemicals that encourage overeating, research has found.

 findings suggest that when you eat something high in fat, your brain gets ‘hit’ with the fatty acids, and you become resistant to insulin and leptin. Since you are not being told by the brain to stop eating, you overeat.” The hormone leptin is produced in the brain and suppresses hunger while insulin is produced by the pancreas and regulates blood sugar levels.Although the study was performed on rats and mice the scientists said their results reinforced common dietary recommendations to limit saturated fat intake as “it causes you to eat more.”The animals received the same amount of calories in one of three forms of fat palmitic acid, monounsaturated fatty acid or unsaturated oleic acid which is found in olive and grapeseed oils.The biggest affect on leptin and insulin was caused by molecules from palmitic acid which is found in beef, butter, cheese and milk.

Dr Clegg, whose findings are published in The Journal of Clinical Investigation, said: “The action was very specific to palmitic acid, which is very high in foods that are rich in saturated fat.She said it may explain why many people who overindulge on a Friday or Saturday say they are hungrier than normal on Monday.The findings may also have implications for diabetes research because although scientists have known a high-fat diet can cause insulin resistance, little has been known about the mechanism behind it or whether specific types of fat are more dangerous.Dr Clegg said “We found the palmitic acid specifically reduced the ability of leptin and insulin to activate their intracellular signalling cascades. The oleic fat did not do this.”She said the other key finding is this mechanism is triggered in the brain – long before there might be signs of obesity anywhere else in the body.Dr Clegg said the next step is to determine how long it takes to reverse completely the effects of short-term exposure to high-fat food.

Findings from public

  Like Junk food
Male 40%  
Female 60%  

From this research, it shows that women consume more junk food than men, which means soo much because it gives us a clear understanding that a lot of women rather prefere going to the shop to buy ready meal rather than spending a long period of time cooking and as for men, nowadays, most men try to cactually cook in the kitchen which is very impressive as before very few men even knew how to cook.

  how often do you eat junk food
Age 12 to 16 1      
Age 16 to 20 3      
Age 20 to 25 2      
Age 25+ 1      

Also looking at this research, it shows that older people dont really bother about junk food, they eat it less as compare to teenagers age 16 to 20, this is very typycal of people at this age as they are still young and always want to try new things. Also looking at kids the age of 12 to 16 it also shows thta they dont eat junk food that much which is good. The reason for them not eating junk food could easily be the fact that they havnt really got much control as they are stil under supervision from their parents and they have to eat what is given to them.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Junk food should not be abused the way it has  these day. People should try and eat more healthy in order to main a healthy lifestyle. Junk foodshould not  be aboused, it can be eaten but not everyday as it can become a very unhealthy lifestyle.

STREET ART EXHIBITION NOTES

 As part of our key concepts in media and communications module, we were asked to go to the Herbert Gallery Street Art Exhibition. So on Tuesday, me and my buddy Sean (5ft, 9”, shoulder length black hair, slim build, my caramel bear) visited in high hopes.

  On entrance my first impressions and thoughts were somewhat of a contradiction to what street art is all about, instead of bricked walls, plastered buildings, and street pavements, everything was displayed on crisp clean white walls, with pretty lights and little plaques!

  Working my way through the gallery there seemed to be a series of emerging themes, such as war shown by Jamie Hewlett’s “Big Spongefinger”, other themes included politics, freedom, justice and suffering. Grouped together these are all negative connotations, but still all can be interpreted very, VERY differently by artists and consumers.

   Looking in more detail at the conflicts and themes, they can be broken down in to different groups, such as socially, politically, and culturally. Throughout the gallery the reoccurring themes are always negative, and never positive in all aspects, and quite often the prints cause controversy, which would explain why the majority of the artists never use the real names (e.g. Banksy) and use pseudonyms. Culturally, some of the paintings are diverse and can be aimed at all cultures, paintings intended at the government and war can be appreciated or criticised by all. In contrast, some prints are meant to be seen as controversial and aimed specifically at one side, whether they are political, protesting decisions made by one party going to war, or just to highlight social problems.

  As I mentioned earlier, the way in which the art is shown within the gallery could be misconstrued as controversial, on the contrary though, it could be seen as the gallery glorifying the street art, classing it as real art, and not vandalism, and at then end of the day CRIME!!!!!! The context in which The Herbert frames the art, in my opinion seems to support all ideas put across, not only are the pieces shown as proudly as any other painting at any other museum, none of the individual pieces seem to contradict one another, almost as if the whole gallery is a list of manifesto points, on a wall!

  The Mohammed Ali exhibit seemed to be romanticised somewhat compared to the rest of the gallery, situated in its own separate room, with dimmed lights, a big cinema screen and a small 2 seater sofa (Sean almost got the wrong idea).

  Street art has always been renowned for holding mass amounts of controversial issues, such as invasion of privacy and freedom of expression. Perhaps the major controversial issue is taking sides, one of my favourite pieces in the exhibition was Banksy’s “Napalm” it depicts Ronald McDonald and Mickey Mouse holding hands  with a young black girl between the both of them, the girl in between them appears to be screaming and in a lot of distress. I believe Banksy is trying to put across how Disney Land and the McDonalds franchise have “kidnapped” the young over the past few generations. The young girl is not in focus as much as the 2 characters, I believe Banksy is trying to put the across the idea that the girl has no voice and there’s nothing she can do about what these cartoons are doing to her, the clearer images of the cartoons seems to put across an idea of importance, power, and furthermore control. The background of the picture is in beige, whereby the girl is in faded black, in contrast Ron’ and Mick’ are in varied greys, which match in terms of their clothes, somewhat as if they are wearing corresponding uniforms, as if they worked as a team. To add to this, the faces are both smiling and both appear to be waving and mid-walking, looking out sideways, to me anyway, it looks as if they are parading through the streets, looking proud of their kidnapping, their work, their job?????????

  In terms of whether or not my ideas and interpretations of street art have changed, well there’s some truth to this, and some of my thoughts haven’t and probably won’t ever change. In terms of what has changed, I understand now how, some artists use their work to put across ideas and views which otherwise they couldn’t put across. I also never realised that street art isn’t just spray painting in tunnels and deserted garages. Short films, camera tricks, even just words can be as effective, as controversial and as clever as any painting could do. In contrast some of the exhibits appear to be utter codswallop!!! Having no apparent meaning or purpose to anything, more often than not, invading privacy and just ruining buildings and streets.

Our Manifesto!

  • Street art should not follow the norm of other imagery
  • Street art should be able to express itself & tell us anything the artists believes to be of importance
  • We believe street art can hold controversial views, this would make the pieces more well known and interesting for the audience
  • We believe street art can be street art, whatever the style, no 2 artists are ever the same
  • Street art should be displayed in public places for anyone who’s anyone to see, there is no need for it to be hidden away
  • Street art should have no limits in terms of time and space
  • Street art should have the freedom to hold risk
  • We believe street art should have shock-value to engage and connect with viewers
  • Street art should not aim itself at one singular audience, controversial or otherwise
  • Finally, street art should be understood by all generations and by the popular culture of the time

We talked about media intuitions and we discussed how the BBC could be controlled in an underhand way and why should it sell movie and TV programmes when we all have to pay the TV licence any way.  This then brought us on to the question on whether the BBC is as free and independent as it claims or should be.


This is the Shannon and Weaver transmission communication model. It shows how the steps link up together and the order in which they follow. it also shows how the noise interferes with routine and contributes to the out come at the end.  This model can be applied and studied in media, and anywhere where a communication is made and needed.

We then discussed and thought about semiotics. Semiotics, from what I found in my research, is the system or signs whether they are images, text, motion imagery or music and ect, and seeing and experiencing the influences and impacts and outcomes on and with the many different audiences and people in their groups. This is now applied and studied in media nowadays so study the media formats and mediums and their impact and meaning and relatively to the different audience demographics.

http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/sem01.html

The link above is the research of this method and Firdinand De Saussure and Roland Barthes theories for the semiotics systems.

http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Levels%20of%20theories/macro/Two-Step%20Flow%20Theory.doc/

The 2 step flow model shows he distirbution of mass media and how it links to the heads of certain opinions or genres or media types and then links to the groups of individual audience groups. The link below the diagram is to a page where i got the image and the research of the 2 step model for media.

http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Mass%20Media/Hypodermic_Needle_Theory.doc/

This image just above shows an example of the Hypodermic Needle Theory applied to mass media. This theory says and claims to show that mass media has a direct hit or impulses a direct response from it’s audience members. This would mean that all it’s audiences would react in the way the film or text or images would want them to, for example a gun shootout in a cowboy film would directly impulse a gun fight within it’s audience members.

The link below this image is the site that i got the image from and where i did my research.

That’s about it for now.

BOTTOM

screenshot from filming action

  • A hit british sitcom from the 1990s
  • It is about two flat mates, Richie Richard and Eddie Hitler, who are on the doll and at the bottom of the social food chain. They love to hate each other and hate to like each other and can’t admit that they are sort of friends.
  • Written by and staring Rik Mayall and Ade Edmondson
  • Years broadcasted on = 1991, 1992, 1995
  • Broadcasted on the BBC network
  • The BBC is meant to be owned by the public as it’s for the public. It’s meant to have been like that since 1927 but since recent revelations and news headlines about strikes showing them to be biased towards a government party in the last few months or so, people are beginning to question if they are a non biased public organisation. This is because, the events and their threats cause people think that there is undercover deals with politically biased bosses or government officials them selves that control what we watch and how they base information as well as persuading you who to like and hate as well as controlling what you can know and find out.
  • BBC makes it’s money from the tv licence and sponsors of companies within a show as well as selling dvds and boxsets (and in the old days vhs sets) of their shows
  • Now broadcasted on Dave and UKTV Gold, freeview channel. They are controlled by Virgin media who has a subscription net work system but have channels brought from sky network