Week In Review #2
Since Tuesday’s class I have been thinking about the question “who is included” in the media. Being a female I have started to think about the television shows that I watch and how women are portrayed. I agree with the class that woman have been portrayed as sex symbols in the media. Although, I do feel that this “vision” is getting better and women are starting to have more powerful roles. I have seen a lot of change since I can remember watching television. For example, when I was younger the show, The Nanny, was very popular. This portrayed women as being that household maid that slept with the owner of the house. I don’t think that women were represented fairly in that. I really feel that the media needs to start exploring different races and lifestyles that may not be “the common” person. If the media was truly there for the viewers they would attempt to represent as many people as possible.
I do not agree with the discussion that we had today about selling body parts on Ebay. I do not understand how people can do that. Why would a company pay that much to post something on one person’s body who may not interact with that many people, when they can put an ad on television. I don’t think that would get them any extra advertising. The only way I see that getting advertising is from the media coverage of such an act. Since it is a new way of advertising the media would probably constantly have reports and interviews with those people. Additionally, through word of mouth people would start talking about the company and the ad. I think that it is a smart way of getting the idea out, but I feel that it is completely wrong. I don’t understand why anyone would do that. Why not wear a shirt that said the slogan on instead of having it put on your body. People wear t-shirts that say the names of stores on them what’s the difference. What’s the need to have it on your body?
In class we were talking about advertising at the Superbowl. Do advertisers have a say in at what point of the show their ad is aired? If so are they more expensive at certain parts of the game? Who chooses the order? Also with the idea of supremacy, if you are an advertiser and pay for an ad on one station does it automatically get posted on the other 12 channels that company owns?
--Shira Cohen
I do not agree with the discussion that we had today about selling body parts on Ebay. I do not understand how people can do that. Why would a company pay that much to post something on one person’s body who may not interact with that many people, when they can put an ad on television. I don’t think that would get them any extra advertising. The only way I see that getting advertising is from the media coverage of such an act. Since it is a new way of advertising the media would probably constantly have reports and interviews with those people. Additionally, through word of mouth people would start talking about the company and the ad. I think that it is a smart way of getting the idea out, but I feel that it is completely wrong. I don’t understand why anyone would do that. Why not wear a shirt that said the slogan on instead of having it put on your body. People wear t-shirts that say the names of stores on them what’s the difference. What’s the need to have it on your body?
In class we were talking about advertising at the Superbowl. Do advertisers have a say in at what point of the show their ad is aired? If so are they more expensive at certain parts of the game? Who chooses the order? Also with the idea of supremacy, if you are an advertiser and pay for an ad on one station does it automatically get posted on the other 12 channels that company owns?
--Shira Cohen
posted by Ron Bishop at 9:08 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home