Jack Small's Online Portfolio
Thank you for teaching me so much about one of the most important but least focused on topics in our society, Ben!
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Thursday, April 19, 2012
The Rhetoric of Ads
For some reason, I've been thinking a lot about advertisements lately. Maybe it's thinking back to the beginning of the semester, when we focused on them a lot. They are incredibly interesting rhetorically.
First, the point of every ad is to get more people to buy this particular product. We have all seen so very many ads by the time we have any income to dispose of on that product, so the creators of these ads have to become very creative to get our attention. There are several ways to go about this, and I'll talk about the onw I find most interesting.
The one I find most interesting are what I think of as anti-ads. They know most people tune ads out, and don't try to hide the fact that they are an ad. They basically yell right out at you, "We know that you know we're only trying to sell this. And that's fine." These remind me of anti-jokes in a way. An anti-joke takes a traditional joke opening, but makes the punchline deliberately unfunny or extremely weird. The confusion following from the unexpected unfunniness makes the anti-joke funny. It's really weird, but good ones usually are funny. Anti-ads are essentially trying to do the same thing. They are confronting that people are expecting their "punchline," or pitch to buy their product, and hoping this makes the consumer want to buy their product. Usually breaking the third wall does this. If done well, I think this is so extremely effective. These anti-ads get us to pay attention to them.
The most recent example of this I can think of is the Dr. Pepper 10 commercials. They immediately confront the fact that they are displaying an ad for a soda right away, and even tell everyone who their consumer base is: men. I think there is some extremely interesting rhetoric behind this. Are they trying to tempt women into buying their product by saying they aren't allowed to have it? Or are they trying to have men feel part of a fraternal Dr. Pepper organization? Probably both, or whatever gives them the most sales. Regardless, I think the commercials are pretty funny.
First, the point of every ad is to get more people to buy this particular product. We have all seen so very many ads by the time we have any income to dispose of on that product, so the creators of these ads have to become very creative to get our attention. There are several ways to go about this, and I'll talk about the onw I find most interesting.
The most recent example of this I can think of is the Dr. Pepper 10 commercials. They immediately confront the fact that they are displaying an ad for a soda right away, and even tell everyone who their consumer base is: men. I think there is some extremely interesting rhetoric behind this. Are they trying to tempt women into buying their product by saying they aren't allowed to have it? Or are they trying to have men feel part of a fraternal Dr. Pepper organization? Probably both, or whatever gives them the most sales. Regardless, I think the commercials are pretty funny.
Thursday, April 12, 2012
The Rhetoric of Death
I already wrote about grief and the potential rhetoric behind it. I thought I'd talk about the cause of grief: death.
Now death is something we all probably think about relatively often. It's something that we must all inevitably face and a lot of people are very uncomfortable talking about it. The culmination of life and the ultimate unknown. I think people are scared more than anything of that fact. Because, no matter what faith you may hold, no one really knows what is going to happen when they die.
I am a Episcopal, but I don't really like to associate myself with religion. I do believe in God and I think I believe in some sort of afterlife. When I ask myself why I think there is an afterlife, I always come to the same conclusion: I can't imagine there being anything else. By that I mean, I can't even fathom there being nothing. I understand that there was tons of nothing before I ever lived, but that doesn't help me to understand the absolute nothingness that may await all of us after our time on Earth is done.
What does this exactly say about me and my beliefs? Well, for one, it's kind of selfish and self-centered. The Earth doesn't revolve around me, which I so humbly know and understand, so why would an afterlife exist simply because I can't understand there being anything else? It doesn't make sense. But it's what I believe regardless.
The other reason I believe in an afterlife is also selfish. I want there to be some kind of reward for all the people that have lived good lives, namely my loved ones. And, as horrible as this sounds when I write it and really think about it, I think those that led bad lives should be punished in some way. What this all boils down to is that I am afraid that the accomplishments and choices we make in this life will count for nothing. This partially stems from my reading of Nietzsche in my Philosophy class, as he says this is the exact reason for the initial formation of religion.
With all that said, and how ridiculous it may be when I think about it, I still believe in an omnipresent, God-like figure that in some sense created the universe. And I believe that our lives do count for something, that something will happen when we die, and that darkness alone does not wait for us. Is it selfish and childish? Probably. I just can't imagine there being anything else though.
Now death is something we all probably think about relatively often. It's something that we must all inevitably face and a lot of people are very uncomfortable talking about it. The culmination of life and the ultimate unknown. I think people are scared more than anything of that fact. Because, no matter what faith you may hold, no one really knows what is going to happen when they die.
I am a Episcopal, but I don't really like to associate myself with religion. I do believe in God and I think I believe in some sort of afterlife. When I ask myself why I think there is an afterlife, I always come to the same conclusion: I can't imagine there being anything else. By that I mean, I can't even fathom there being nothing. I understand that there was tons of nothing before I ever lived, but that doesn't help me to understand the absolute nothingness that may await all of us after our time on Earth is done.
What does this exactly say about me and my beliefs? Well, for one, it's kind of selfish and self-centered. The Earth doesn't revolve around me, which I so humbly know and understand, so why would an afterlife exist simply because I can't understand there being anything else? It doesn't make sense. But it's what I believe regardless.
The other reason I believe in an afterlife is also selfish. I want there to be some kind of reward for all the people that have lived good lives, namely my loved ones. And, as horrible as this sounds when I write it and really think about it, I think those that led bad lives should be punished in some way. What this all boils down to is that I am afraid that the accomplishments and choices we make in this life will count for nothing. This partially stems from my reading of Nietzsche in my Philosophy class, as he says this is the exact reason for the initial formation of religion.
With all that said, and how ridiculous it may be when I think about it, I still believe in an omnipresent, God-like figure that in some sense created the universe. And I believe that our lives do count for something, that something will happen when we die, and that darkness alone does not wait for us. Is it selfish and childish? Probably. I just can't imagine there being anything else though.
Thursday, April 5, 2012
What's in a Name?
This week I want to examine something that I have always thought about: the rhetoric of names. A name is one of the most defining characteristics of our beings. Many of us are given common, unoriginal names while a select few are bestowed with completely unique names (such as Jermajesty, the unfortunately named son of Jermaine Jackson). The worst part is, we have no say of our names, and are virtually brainwashed into liking them. We are basically trained to answer to them, and after hearing it so many times and becoming pretty attached to it, we are almost forced to accept it. Yes, we can go through the process of changing our names, but that is pretty uncommon and seems like a lot of work. Plus, only people that want to be named Spiderman actually go and get their names changed.
I was born with the name Jack. It was after my grandfather, whose real name is John, but everyone calls him Jack (it gets a little confusing when we're in the same room during the holidays). My mom always says she made naming kids Jack popular, because I was born a couple of years before a huge boom of little boys being named Jack.
What I've always noticed is how many television or movie characters are named Jack. When you look for it, you really find it quite a lot. For example, just to name a few, there's: Jack Bauer, from 24; Jack Shephard from Lost; Jack McCoy from Law and Order; Jack Dawson from Titanic; Jack Sparrow from Pirates of the Caribbean; Jack Skellington from The Nightmare Before Christmas; and the list goes on. I have to add that Jack is much more common in American television and film compared to those from the UK and Australia, where the name is much more popular (the most popular in recent years). What about American television calls for the dominance of my name?
Something all the characters named Jack have in common is that they are all extremely strong male leads. Jack Bauer stopped countless terrorist attacks while Jack Shephard lead the survivors of Oceanic Flight 815. And Jack Dawson let himself freeze to death in the water so Rose could live after the sinking of the Titanic. Something about the name Jack seems to breed these selfless, complicated leaders. I am focusing on Jack not only because it is my name, but because of the standards I have to face while competing with these giants of the media. It really isn't fair for me.
Hahhaha, anyway, this is just something I've always noticed, because anyone is more inclined to pay attention when their name is mentioned. I couldn't find anything like a study of what names mean in the sphere of the media, so I figured I'd right about it. I'm sure there are tons of connections between the names of characters and the traits they are given.
 |
| I hope to be half the man he is. fanpop.com |
I was born with the name Jack. It was after my grandfather, whose real name is John, but everyone calls him Jack (it gets a little confusing when we're in the same room during the holidays). My mom always says she made naming kids Jack popular, because I was born a couple of years before a huge boom of little boys being named Jack.
What I've always noticed is how many television or movie characters are named Jack. When you look for it, you really find it quite a lot. For example, just to name a few, there's: Jack Bauer, from 24; Jack Shephard from Lost; Jack McCoy from Law and Order; Jack Dawson from Titanic; Jack Sparrow from Pirates of the Caribbean; Jack Skellington from The Nightmare Before Christmas; and the list goes on. I have to add that Jack is much more common in American television and film compared to those from the UK and Australia, where the name is much more popular (the most popular in recent years). What about American television calls for the dominance of my name?
Something all the characters named Jack have in common is that they are all extremely strong male leads. Jack Bauer stopped countless terrorist attacks while Jack Shephard lead the survivors of Oceanic Flight 815. And Jack Dawson let himself freeze to death in the water so Rose could live after the sinking of the Titanic. Something about the name Jack seems to breed these selfless, complicated leaders. I am focusing on Jack not only because it is my name, but because of the standards I have to face while competing with these giants of the media. It really isn't fair for me.
Hahhaha, anyway, this is just something I've always noticed, because anyone is more inclined to pay attention when their name is mentioned. I couldn't find anything like a study of what names mean in the sphere of the media, so I figured I'd right about it. I'm sure there are tons of connections between the names of characters and the traits they are given.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
The Rhetoric of (Older) Music
I was thinking about making a post about all music, but that's way too long and extensive for me to properly cover. I am probably only going to focus on one song, depending on how this post goes as I write it.
The song I am listening to now is "American Pie" by Don McLean. I guarantee that you know what this song is. It's by far one of the most famous songs in American history. It's about 9 minutes long, which has some rhetoric implications in itself. Today, many songs aren't longer than 4 minutes, 5 at the most. However, this song manages to be completely engaging through the whole 8:42. Maybe it's the audience that usually listens to the song appreciates music with a message, which I think can take a longer amount of time to fully develop. And this song has a feel of a jam-session a little bit. Like they just started recording and went on. I doubt that's what actually happened, but it feels like that. Jam music is a very interesting study in itself, and lots of people love the pure music feeling it provides.
The crux of this song is the lyrics. It recounts the Day the Music Died, or when the plan carrying Buddy Holly, the Big Bopper, and Ritchie Valens, and the aftermath of the tragic event. This song has the effect of portraying grief in the traditional, sad sense. But there's also an Irish wake feel to the grief. The song is not entirely song, as the build-up to the song is fast-paced and fun. It gets incredibly sad near the end, but ends at a hopeful kind of note. I don't know if any of that made sense, but I think listening to the song helps to give the real feel of what's happening.
I've listened to this song so many times and every time it still seems like a surprise when I hear it. It's such a pure song. Again, I don't know if that makes sense, but it really just seems pure to me. Music at its best, telling a great story and getting you to feel a lot of different things. On another note, my mom knows all the lyrics to this song, which is pretty impressive. She proceeds to belt it out any time it is played to prove to everyone that she knows the lyrics, even though no one questions her.
If you don't sing along to the chorus, I don't know if you can ever appreciate music!
Bye, bye Miss American Pie
Drove my Chevy to the levy, but the levy was dry
...I'll let you finish the rest.
The song I am listening to now is "American Pie" by Don McLean. I guarantee that you know what this song is. It's by far one of the most famous songs in American history. It's about 9 minutes long, which has some rhetoric implications in itself. Today, many songs aren't longer than 4 minutes, 5 at the most. However, this song manages to be completely engaging through the whole 8:42. Maybe it's the audience that usually listens to the song appreciates music with a message, which I think can take a longer amount of time to fully develop. And this song has a feel of a jam-session a little bit. Like they just started recording and went on. I doubt that's what actually happened, but it feels like that. Jam music is a very interesting study in itself, and lots of people love the pure music feeling it provides.
The crux of this song is the lyrics. It recounts the Day the Music Died, or when the plan carrying Buddy Holly, the Big Bopper, and Ritchie Valens, and the aftermath of the tragic event. This song has the effect of portraying grief in the traditional, sad sense. But there's also an Irish wake feel to the grief. The song is not entirely song, as the build-up to the song is fast-paced and fun. It gets incredibly sad near the end, but ends at a hopeful kind of note. I don't know if any of that made sense, but I think listening to the song helps to give the real feel of what's happening.
I've listened to this song so many times and every time it still seems like a surprise when I hear it. It's such a pure song. Again, I don't know if that makes sense, but it really just seems pure to me. Music at its best, telling a great story and getting you to feel a lot of different things. On another note, my mom knows all the lyrics to this song, which is pretty impressive. She proceeds to belt it out any time it is played to prove to everyone that she knows the lyrics, even though no one questions her.
If you don't sing along to the chorus, I don't know if you can ever appreciate music!
Bye, bye Miss American Pie
Drove my Chevy to the levy, but the levy was dry
...I'll let you finish the rest.
Friday, March 23, 2012
The Rhetoric of Twitter
 |
| The Twitter logo. www.twitter.com |
The required brevity of tweets requires users to be concise about what they want their followers to read about them. Longer tweets require two messages, and no one likes a two-message (or longer) tweet. It's sloppy and shows the inability to shorten your own thoughts for the sake of your followers.
Now, most people do not care about what most other people are doing at any given time in the day. The main reason Twitter succeeded at all is because people were (and still are) very much interested in what certain people, usually celebrities or political figures, are doing/thinking at any time. This ability was unprecedented and allowed people to connect to their favorite celebrities in a way that still astounds me.
Twitter has had incredible world-wide impacts as well. The most dramatic example of this is the role social media, and especially Twitter, played in the Arab Spring, when many countries in the Middle East coordinated their strives towards freedom through Twitter. In a more day-to-day example, Twitter is almost like a news source. Whenever I hear about something I feel is unbelievable, the death of a celebrity for example, I immediately turn to Twitter to see if it is true. When news of something particularly influential breaks, people flock to Twitter to speak their minds on the issue. In fact, I get more of my news from the Trending Topics on Twitter (the collection of the most tweeted-about words/phrases) than anything else.
Social media as a whole has lead to such change in the world, and I feel that Twitter will exponentially increase this impact and help people as whole will become more socially aware.
Friday, March 16, 2012
The Rhetoric of Movies
Since I've been doing my passion blog, I've noticed a couple things about movies. The most glaring being how many movies center, or at least involve, some aspect of crime. All but one of the movies I have watched (which are all included in IMDB's top 250, which fans vote for) have centered around crime or prison, and the one that didn't had an aspect of crime in it (Groundhog Day features Bill Murray being chased by police after he steals Punxsutawny Phil). This got me thinking.
Why are crime films received better among the public? People watch movies more or less as an escape, to sit down and fantasize (or dread about) a different kind of reality. Do that many people wish they could break the law in all these different kinds of ways? I think the phenomena goes deeper than simply people like the crime aspect they cannot live in their own lives. I instead believe that's it almost a trickle down effect.
Directors usually want to be taken seriously and considered great. Most directors of romantic comedies are not considered to be fantastic directors (a generalization that isn't always true, I know). If you look at great directors (Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino, Christopher Nolan, Clint Eastwood, etc) most of their films involve some element of crime (the only real exception I found was Steven Spielberg). Since these great directors usually desire to do crime-centered movies, those movies are automatically at an advantage to be better. And it doesn't stop there. Great directors usually have good relationships with great actors (Jack Nicholson with Scorsese is the most glaring example). The effect great actors can have on a movie is astronomical. And these great directors and actors have their great relationships with great screenwriters, composers, film crews, and all the way down the line. So from this great director comes an entire slew of talent. It makes you think how any crime movies could fail at all.
 |
| Director Martin Scorsese with some of the best actors of our time. ethiopolitics.com |
Why are crime films received better among the public? People watch movies more or less as an escape, to sit down and fantasize (or dread about) a different kind of reality. Do that many people wish they could break the law in all these different kinds of ways? I think the phenomena goes deeper than simply people like the crime aspect they cannot live in their own lives. I instead believe that's it almost a trickle down effect.
Directors usually want to be taken seriously and considered great. Most directors of romantic comedies are not considered to be fantastic directors (a generalization that isn't always true, I know). If you look at great directors (Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino, Christopher Nolan, Clint Eastwood, etc) most of their films involve some element of crime (the only real exception I found was Steven Spielberg). Since these great directors usually desire to do crime-centered movies, those movies are automatically at an advantage to be better. And it doesn't stop there. Great directors usually have good relationships with great actors (Jack Nicholson with Scorsese is the most glaring example). The effect great actors can have on a movie is astronomical. And these great directors and actors have their great relationships with great screenwriters, composers, film crews, and all the way down the line. So from this great director comes an entire slew of talent. It makes you think how any crime movies could fail at all.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
The Rhetoric of Spring Break
 |
| These picture will ALWAYS end up on the internet. collegewallofshame.com |
I've already touched on the common perception of college students, so I will try to spare the generalizations and focus on the perceptions as it applies to Spring Break. Many of these college students on these trips to various paradises around the world partake in some questionable behavior, and that seems to get widely critiqued. I agree that these students might at times get a little out of control, but everyone has to consider the origins of this reputation for college kids going crazy during Spring Break. After all, most of the people now judging these students are responsible for the current reputation.
This is a main reason I criticize older adults who criticize young adults. These perceptions are usually skewed negatively from the start, and skewed because of how they themselves acted when they were younger. What most adults fail to realize is the reason why they no longer act like college students. Most of these adults learned to recognize and avoid this potentially self-destructive by acting out and suffering the consequences. Trial and error still remains, and probably will always remain, as the main and best way to learn about life. The young adults of today will learn that this behavior they currently partake in cannot and will not allow them to succeed in the real world. But they will not learn this by older people yelling at them to act like they are currently acting. If anything, this only makes younger people want to rebel MORE. I just think those older adults out there need to remember all the stupid things they did when they were young (and I bet my life that everyone has those moments) and relax a little bit. People sometimes need to burn their hand on the stove before they learn to check if the burners are on first. It's a part of life, and something I believe contributes to how beautiful life really is. And those current young adults need to relax when they become the older adults. Although this will never happen, I like to think wishfully.
So, college students everywhere, have a wonderful Spring Break. Do some stupid things, but nothing that you know is dangerously stupid. Don't resist on taking a risk for fear of what your parents would think. They've done worst, even if they refuse to admit it to you.
Friday, February 24, 2012
The Rhetoric of State Patty's Day
As I'm sure you all know, this weekend is State Patty's Day. State Patty's Day (SPD) is an invented holiday by Penn State students where the only purpose of the day is to drink as much alcohol. SPD has gotten various media coverage because of the elevated numbers of alcohol-related hospitalizations that happen over the weekend. Many students from around the country frequent the State College area for this excuse to get drunk. But what does this holiday say about Penn State, especially when it is coming a weekend after THON?
After THON, and over $10.6 million raised FTK, the common theme among Penn State students is that our reputation as a world class institution and student body has been restored. Then again, with SPD following the next weekend, I don't see how the great things done at THON will automatically outweigh all the bad that has happened and surely will this weekend. I'm not saying students shouldn't be allowed to go out and have fun, but they have to realize the consequences associated with doing such, and should not complain because of these consequences.
SPD has also helped to confirm Penn State as one of the top "party schools" in the country. This is a reputation that the administration and parts of the student body are vehemently against, but that others embrace. I wonder how much this truly hurts job opportunities for Penn Staters, since the alumni connection is said to be so strong between those who have never even met. The fact is, many students factor in how the parties at potential colleges are before choosing the college they attend. If the party school reputation brings in more students, is that necessarily a bad thing? I understand that students who simply make a decision based off of how good a school's parties are might not be the best students, but the most innovative people are not always the best in school. Steve Jobs dropped out of college before creating Apple. I know that's an incredibly rare case, but it DOES happen.
Basically, I'm split on how to perceive SPD. On one hand, I can see the negative attention it brings to the university, and why that potentially should be stopped. On the other hand, I see it as a way to bring friends up to your school, and show them a good time. I guess the only real suggestion I have is to have a good time, but always in moderation. When you're having way too much fun in a particular instance, chances are something is wrong with the situation.
After THON, and over $10.6 million raised FTK, the common theme among Penn State students is that our reputation as a world class institution and student body has been restored. Then again, with SPD following the next weekend, I don't see how the great things done at THON will automatically outweigh all the bad that has happened and surely will this weekend. I'm not saying students shouldn't be allowed to go out and have fun, but they have to realize the consequences associated with doing such, and should not complain because of these consequences.
SPD has also helped to confirm Penn State as one of the top "party schools" in the country. This is a reputation that the administration and parts of the student body are vehemently against, but that others embrace. I wonder how much this truly hurts job opportunities for Penn Staters, since the alumni connection is said to be so strong between those who have never even met. The fact is, many students factor in how the parties at potential colleges are before choosing the college they attend. If the party school reputation brings in more students, is that necessarily a bad thing? I understand that students who simply make a decision based off of how good a school's parties are might not be the best students, but the most innovative people are not always the best in school. Steve Jobs dropped out of college before creating Apple. I know that's an incredibly rare case, but it DOES happen.
Basically, I'm split on how to perceive SPD. On one hand, I can see the negative attention it brings to the university, and why that potentially should be stopped. On the other hand, I see it as a way to bring friends up to your school, and show them a good time. I guess the only real suggestion I have is to have a good time, but always in moderation. When you're having way too much fun in a particular instance, chances are something is wrong with the situation.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
The Rhetoric of THON
I'll probably post about this again on Monday, after THON is over. With the building anticipation of what I truly believe is the best event on any college campus, I can literally think of little else besides this 46 hour long Dance Marathon.
I'm on a Rules and Regulations Committee, which basically means I'll be working security for a little over half of THON. 5 hours on, 5 hours of is the custom. So what does this dedication say about Penn State, college students, and what people think about cancer?
For our last meeting, everyone in the committee talked about why we personally are doing THON. I was so surprised by how many people have, one way or another, been affected so drastically by cancer. Almost everyone in our 40+ person committee said losing a loved one to cancer was a huge motivator as to why they are volunteering for THON. What I think this says is that there may be no greater inspiration in the world than the lost of a loved one. Although these people are gone and cannot tell us how great whatever we are doing in their honor is, it seems that most people don't particularly care about that, and simply want to do good in the name of a lost loved one. This can, as in the case of THON, be a tremendously good thing. I'm sure that someone's strife to make a loved one proud has led to terrible, terrible things too. I think using loved ones as a motivation can be a great thing, it simply depends on what the motivation is being used for.
Penn State has been racked by so much scandal these past few months, that I think THON should have a huge impact on the image of Penn State. People need to realize that great, wonderful things are happening on this campus, and that THON is simply the most visible of these things. Thousands upon thousands of students are volunteering their time and unmatched effort for so many diverse and equally great causes, and I hate to see THON get so much publicity over everything else combined.
College students are often a slightly maligned set of people. We are commonly seen as lazy, unmotivated, and wasting our youth away for various bad pursuits. THON and other charities should put these stereotypes right away, yet they seem to prevail. Unfortunately, I cannot see a reason for this stereotype to change, because people have every reason to rid the preconceptions of college students they old now, and still neglect to.
 |
| nittanywhiteout.com |
For our last meeting, everyone in the committee talked about why we personally are doing THON. I was so surprised by how many people have, one way or another, been affected so drastically by cancer. Almost everyone in our 40+ person committee said losing a loved one to cancer was a huge motivator as to why they are volunteering for THON. What I think this says is that there may be no greater inspiration in the world than the lost of a loved one. Although these people are gone and cannot tell us how great whatever we are doing in their honor is, it seems that most people don't particularly care about that, and simply want to do good in the name of a lost loved one. This can, as in the case of THON, be a tremendously good thing. I'm sure that someone's strife to make a loved one proud has led to terrible, terrible things too. I think using loved ones as a motivation can be a great thing, it simply depends on what the motivation is being used for.
Penn State has been racked by so much scandal these past few months, that I think THON should have a huge impact on the image of Penn State. People need to realize that great, wonderful things are happening on this campus, and that THON is simply the most visible of these things. Thousands upon thousands of students are volunteering their time and unmatched effort for so many diverse and equally great causes, and I hate to see THON get so much publicity over everything else combined.
College students are often a slightly maligned set of people. We are commonly seen as lazy, unmotivated, and wasting our youth away for various bad pursuits. THON and other charities should put these stereotypes right away, yet they seem to prevail. Unfortunately, I cannot see a reason for this stereotype to change, because people have every reason to rid the preconceptions of college students they old now, and still neglect to.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
The Rhetoric of Headphones
 |
| My beats that I adore so very much. www.drdrebeatsdetox.com |
Those white Apple headphones that come with their products used to mean a great deal. They used to mean that you could afford an iPod, and that meant something. You could listen to music while walking down the street, and you didn't need CDs, or a radio or anything silly like that. You were able to choose the music you wanted to listen to, and listen to it.
Now, when almost everybody under 40 probably owns an iPod, those white headphones are everywhere. Having them means nothing, only that you've bought into the fad along with everybody else (I'm not excluded from this group, so please don't get offended). So, something had to happen with headphones.
There have been various companies that have tried to capitalize on this instinctive nature to appear different from the masses. The one that comes easiest to mind is Skullcandy. I think their headphones are absolutely gaudy and somewhat horrible, but I respect them for trying something new. The latest fad in headphones has been Beats.
Beats, by Dre, are over-the-head headphones that are said to produce the best sound quality of any headphones. I myself bought a pair of Beats, and I really had to think about why. At the end of the day, I could have stayed with normal iPod headphones, but I felt a need to be different from the masses (even though tons of people own Beats). So, I spent the outrageous amount of money I spent on something that only professional DJs could really use. I love my Beats more than anything in life, but they are completely unnecessary. All in an attempt to be different.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Thursday, February 2, 2012
The Rhetoric of National Signing Day
Yesterday, as you may or may not know, is a HUGE day in college football. The first of February marks National Signing Day, when many of the best college football recruits in the country mail in their Letters of Intent if they've already committed to a school, or decide what school they will take their talents to (if they are highly-touted enough, this decision is filmed on national television).
The common practice for the decisions for these prospective athletes, regardless of whether they are televised or not, is to have hats of the schools they are considering on the table in front of them, then eventually selecting the school out of those hats.
Watching kids decide their futures in front of potentially millions of people watching at home got me thinking about the entire college football recruiting process. It is a very odd thing when you break it down. Men, usually in between their 40s and 60s, travel around the country trying to essentially woo 17 and 18 year olds to take their school's scholarships over all the other ones they may have (and recruiting doesn't only begin when a kid is 17 or 18, it usually starts the sophomore year of high school, but USC once got a 12 year old QB to commit to them). The drama truly starts to unfold when these kids promise to go to a school, and "commit," but since these "commitments" aren't binding in the least, these high school students often change their mind. That's what drives so many college football fans crazy. When a committed player take his promise to go to your school and decides to go elsewhere (even *GASP* your archrival!!!) fans end up taking it personally and slew these kids with insults. When fans decide to take a change of heart as a personal assault, they see no possible recourse but to flood message boards with like-minded fans of the same program with attacks on 17 & 18 year old's character, decision-making skills, and overall intelligence.
What I think must happen is fans must relax when it comes to these prospects, remember that most of them don't even pan out to be the superstars they were expected to, and, most importantly, think how you would want people to treat your kid if he promised to go to one school, saw it really wasn't for him, then simply changed his mind, thinking about what would be best for him in the future.
The common practice for the decisions for these prospective athletes, regardless of whether they are televised or not, is to have hats of the schools they are considering on the table in front of them, then eventually selecting the school out of those hats.
Watching kids decide their futures in front of potentially millions of people watching at home got me thinking about the entire college football recruiting process. It is a very odd thing when you break it down. Men, usually in between their 40s and 60s, travel around the country trying to essentially woo 17 and 18 year olds to take their school's scholarships over all the other ones they may have (and recruiting doesn't only begin when a kid is 17 or 18, it usually starts the sophomore year of high school, but USC once got a 12 year old QB to commit to them). The drama truly starts to unfold when these kids promise to go to a school, and "commit," but since these "commitments" aren't binding in the least, these high school students often change their mind. That's what drives so many college football fans crazy. When a committed player take his promise to go to your school and decides to go elsewhere (even *GASP* your archrival!!!) fans end up taking it personally and slew these kids with insults. When fans decide to take a change of heart as a personal assault, they see no possible recourse but to flood message boards with like-minded fans of the same program with attacks on 17 & 18 year old's character, decision-making skills, and overall intelligence.
What I think must happen is fans must relax when it comes to these prospects, remember that most of them don't even pan out to be the superstars they were expected to, and, most importantly, think how you would want people to treat your kid if he promised to go to one school, saw it really wasn't for him, then simply changed his mind, thinking about what would be best for him in the future.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
The Rhetoric of Grief
I was fortunate enough to be able to attend Joe Paterno's Memorial service just a few hours ago. I found this to be such an incredible event. If anything could help the Penn State community attempt to return to some sort of normalcy after the tumultuous last few months, it would be this final sendoff to the man we all held near and dear to our hearts.
If the memorial taught me anything, it was to look at Joe Paterno as not simply a great coach, philanthropist, or even human being. It taught me to look at him, and all other great people I aspire to be like, in relation to their families. For these men and women are more than only that to the families that helped make them who they are. To these families they are parents, children, siblings, and loved ones. They see sides of these people we never get to see, know secrets about these people we never know, and deal with these people at their absolute worsts. If anyone deserves to be cherished and applauded for Joe Paterno and all the good he has done, I truly believe the family's role in his accomplishments must be acknowledged. They say behind every great man lies an even greater woman, I believe that behind every great person lies an even greater family.
As we move forward from all these events, I am not naive enough to believe that things will be the same. We cannot forget about the tragedy that occurred here, and we must face the shame that accompanies it every day. There will never be another Joe Paterno, and I would have it no other way. The best we can do is remember the good times with a smile, make a vow to never allow anything like those heinous acts to happen again, and look forward to our future. And, in the words of Jay Paterno, I would like to tell Joe that, "You won. You did all that you can do, you've done enough. We all love you. You can go home now." Let's let Joe go home, the family grieve in peace, and Happy Valley return into the quiet, loving place that made it so special in the first place.
 | |
| Photo by Shawn Inglima for www.onwardstate.com |
If the memorial taught me anything, it was to look at Joe Paterno as not simply a great coach, philanthropist, or even human being. It taught me to look at him, and all other great people I aspire to be like, in relation to their families. For these men and women are more than only that to the families that helped make them who they are. To these families they are parents, children, siblings, and loved ones. They see sides of these people we never get to see, know secrets about these people we never know, and deal with these people at their absolute worsts. If anyone deserves to be cherished and applauded for Joe Paterno and all the good he has done, I truly believe the family's role in his accomplishments must be acknowledged. They say behind every great man lies an even greater woman, I believe that behind every great person lies an even greater family.
As we move forward from all these events, I am not naive enough to believe that things will be the same. We cannot forget about the tragedy that occurred here, and we must face the shame that accompanies it every day. There will never be another Joe Paterno, and I would have it no other way. The best we can do is remember the good times with a smile, make a vow to never allow anything like those heinous acts to happen again, and look forward to our future. And, in the words of Jay Paterno, I would like to tell Joe that, "You won. You did all that you can do, you've done enough. We all love you. You can go home now." Let's let Joe go home, the family grieve in peace, and Happy Valley return into the quiet, loving place that made it so special in the first place.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Taxidermist Humor
We watched this video in one of my THON Committee meetings. When I first saw I thought it was the funniest thing ever, and I still do.
I had to check the website just to make sure this commercial for Ojai Valley Taxidermy was real, and it apparently is a legitimate Taxidermy company. I tried to think of why this commercial is funny. Is it because of the ridiculous situations these animals are put in (my favorite being the bear in the bed)? Is it because of Chuck Testa's catchphrase of "Nope?" Is it Chuck Testa himself, ultimately proving that taxidermists are the funniest profession? Or is it simply that our culture thinks stuffed animals are funny by themselves? I like to think it's a combination of all of these factors.
The next question is, while this commercial may be comical, does it accomplish its goal? That is, after watching the ad, am I more likely to pay for the services offered by Ojai Valley Taxidermy? It's said at the end of the ad that "Chuck Testa does not taxidermize pets," so that must hurt the business somewhat. I am not privy to the hunting culture and what they think of this video. My guess is that most serious hunters have a personal taxidermist, like most people have a particular barber/hair dresser, so I find it somewhat unlikely that many animals were stuffed as a result of this video. This is all depending on if the goal was to help the taxidermy aspect of the business. If the goal was to simply go viral and have more traffic on the website, I would say with over 10 million views, that was easily successful. I truly do not know much about the taxidermy business, but I would assume that isn't the best profession during this economic downturn. That could be another goal. If the Ojai Valley Taxidermy industry was hit hard by the recession, the ad could have been made in the hopes of going viral. The website sells clothing including the "Nope" that made Chuck Testa famous, so that's obviously a possibility.
To me, the video is successful if only for making millions of people laugh around the world. It's nice to be able to step out of the stress of everyday life, watch a completely ridiculous ad, and relax, even if only for a minute. Thank you Chuck Testa, men like you make this world a better place.
I had to check the website just to make sure this commercial for Ojai Valley Taxidermy was real, and it apparently is a legitimate Taxidermy company. I tried to think of why this commercial is funny. Is it because of the ridiculous situations these animals are put in (my favorite being the bear in the bed)? Is it because of Chuck Testa's catchphrase of "Nope?" Is it Chuck Testa himself, ultimately proving that taxidermists are the funniest profession? Or is it simply that our culture thinks stuffed animals are funny by themselves? I like to think it's a combination of all of these factors.
The next question is, while this commercial may be comical, does it accomplish its goal? That is, after watching the ad, am I more likely to pay for the services offered by Ojai Valley Taxidermy? It's said at the end of the ad that "Chuck Testa does not taxidermize pets," so that must hurt the business somewhat. I am not privy to the hunting culture and what they think of this video. My guess is that most serious hunters have a personal taxidermist, like most people have a particular barber/hair dresser, so I find it somewhat unlikely that many animals were stuffed as a result of this video. This is all depending on if the goal was to help the taxidermy aspect of the business. If the goal was to simply go viral and have more traffic on the website, I would say with over 10 million views, that was easily successful. I truly do not know much about the taxidermy business, but I would assume that isn't the best profession during this economic downturn. That could be another goal. If the Ojai Valley Taxidermy industry was hit hard by the recession, the ad could have been made in the hopes of going viral. The website sells clothing including the "Nope" that made Chuck Testa famous, so that's obviously a possibility.
To me, the video is successful if only for making millions of people laugh around the world. It's nice to be able to step out of the stress of everyday life, watch a completely ridiculous ad, and relax, even if only for a minute. Thank you Chuck Testa, men like you make this world a better place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)