COMM 322: Final Project: The Effect of Video Games and Women in the Military

Matt Miller is the only one who i could not find the Label for so i just put his name in

Life in the Digital Now (Abha Dawesar)

I watched a Ted Talk today while relaxing in my living room, and what was being said by the speaker struck to be true. Well, it struck to be true in my mind because it has been a conversation that I have had many times with friends. This conversation usually occurs when a friend feels like they must tweet, snap chat, or instagram every moment that they live in. I am a person who would rather live in the moment, remember it, and tell it in story format when asked rather than pausing it to update everyone (Instagram being an exception at times). Every now and then I will tweet after a current event is over.

Abha Dawesar is an Indian novel writer who gets her ideas from anywhere and everywhere. Her presentation "Life in the Digital Now" talks about how our century is an era that not only sees food, water, and shelter as physiological needs, but we might as well include technology (a jokingly true oxymoron). She discusses the fact that we make sure there is technology available everywhere in the world that we live in, which displays the digital now. We use social media to share or experience what life means, but in return we are messing with the time continuum. We don't fully experience life or who we are as individuals because we push aside the entire experience. Take a look at this video and keep an open mind on her theory. It is very abstract!

http://www.ted.com/talks/abha_dawesar_life_in_the_digital_now.html?source=facebook#.UoufGAGqD5V.facebook

HB Sweep Under the Rug (Sports & Politics)

I never took the time to think about how our sports nation can be so political until our class took the time to watch a video that exposed a lot in the NFL. What seems to be true is that the Government calls America to sweep a lot of information underneath the rug. How can any sport in America be so political if the players and coaches have objectives outside of it? It is because neither are in control of what goes on behind the scenes. In any industry, there will always be someone pulling the strings. Some examples of politics that are outside of sports are gender arguments, at home issues, and of course the military intervening. We are even exposed to the illusion of glorified war rather than the flaws that can take place (possibly, not saying it does all the time).

So not only is there recruiting involvement through video games, but there is also involvement through everyday sports. Recruitment is not the only thing being embraced, but there is also a way that our country’s symbol being promoted multiple times at any game causes us to show pride in our heritage. I mean that we go beyond acknowledging our freedom and embracing it. We tend to act on the wild side whenever American symbolism takes place, and sometimes become bashful toward any other country. How is it that whenever America is embraced, we forget the reason that we even came to a sporting event? These are just a few observations that I made while watching the video in class. 

An Open Book

I want to start my blog post off by saying that Caleb rocks! I had such a grand time in class (mainly through laughs). So anyway, I lot of things that were mentioned about the idea of gender and geek culture struck to be true. But one statement stuck out to me the most during our conversation on Friday. Caleb mentioned that society has tried to frame what women want (to be independent and strong), and there was a student who figured that this statement was true. Caleb responded by saying that women don’t want to be spoken for, but rather told that they can be anything rather than something specific. 

I would have to agree with this idea. Whether society tells us what women are/what for the best, or for the worst (women aren’t gamers), I think it is important for people to reconsider the ideas given. I could of sworn that men found it hard to put their fingers on women because they are such a complex species, and here we are labeling women for who they “are”. It is easy to take what is on the outside of the woman and not consider what she is really defined as. Women now-a-days have to prove who they are in their given claims because it is seen as very farfetched. 

What is a solution for this? Honestly, the ladies should keep proving men/society wrong. In the eyes of a woman it must be quite entertaining. Common human nature can be difficult to undo, but it can be impacted.

Where Did These Housewives Come From?

Let’s try to keep a tally mark here! Think of all the housewife shows there are in the TV industry. We have all six “The Real Housewives” shows, and let’s not forget “Basketball Wives”, “Hip Hop Wives of Atlanta”, and probably some other house wife shows that I am missing (like space wives of Mars or something like that. Just joking). I believe that I am at the point that I have accepted the reality that these reality shows will keep coming on a global scale. In fact, there are already International house wife shows airing in different places such as Athens, there were shows airing in France, and now there will be a show in Melbourne. The housewife legacy seems to be thriving in many cultures for some reason. What is hard to figure out is why and how does this continue to happen?

What is it that keeps these reality shows going? It must be something in particular that viewers find appealing to keep watching such shows. I recall discussing in class the multiple reasons of why we like to watch reality TV shows of people. Many of these reasons include watching people be dumb with their money & then respond by our claims of being better, comparisons, ambition, and other various reasons. But why in particular is there a massive amount of house wife shows sharing the same theme? Is this another way of backing up women empowerment? 

I’m sure that there are many motives to the given outcome, but I feel like these kind of shows offer a bit of everything with an extra amount of drama. If you think about it, according to presentational zen, next to story telling is conflict as far as gaining human interest. We are so intrigued by hearing conflict happen between people or situations that we may not particularly be apart of. These shows are expected to have climatic battles between favorite characters in the show. This may not be the motive for directors to get their rating up (not my assumption), but I do feel like it could be a huge reason why.

Is it Really?

You would think distinguishing reality television from fictional television would be as easy as determining left from right (some still struggle with this). It is not fair for me to come to terms that every "reality" show is fraud, but I do struggle with the thought that every scene being shot is not scripted. It also makes me wonder if the lifestyles shown on reality television are of true essence, or if the lifestyles are altered and tweaked by the producers. Based off of lecture notes, this proposes the theory that some things you see on TV may be hyper-real reality, emphasizing the concept that people on your television set work hard and are driven like any ordinary person working on the come up. This is indeed real, but the way it is marketed may be false. 

Whenever I sat and watched shows like Real Pastors of LA, Ghost Hunters, or one of a million house wife shows that airs on every “stinkin” channel there is, it makes me wonder how far someone will go to get air time. I am not here to judge, but I will question and attempt to distinguish what is realistic and what is fraud. An example would be “Real Pastors of LA”. It is hard to see how entertainment has infiltrated church congregations. This show highlights the glitter and glamour of living a pastor lifestyle in LA rather than the Christian values that the Pastor or church congregation lives by. Honestly I think this makes the church look like a joke, and it makes the spokesman of the church seem a bit lustful for perishable objects. Granted, I get that if you work hard for something then you deserve it, but the things that television tries to highlight makes it seem a bit out of context. 

With this being said, who is in control of what is being shown on TV? Do Pastors go the extra mile to look impressive while shining God’s light, or do the producers offer/demand what makes Television interesting? Typically it is a story that involves drama, fortune, or poverty. Television probably doesn’t make it difficult to determine left from right, but rather it may reflect a toddler putting their shoes on the wrong feet.