Sometimes I forget just how lucky I am. Too often do I find myself thinking ‘I have to have that..’, or ‘I need a..’ or something similar. It’s easy for us all to look past the positive people and things in our lives and focus on the negatives and what we feel is missing. This is likely why we all feel such moral guilt when we see and hear organizations asking for donations or for support for a charity. We compare ourselves to celebrity figures and our iconic idols and feel inadequate in their shadow of luxury but hardly ever do we stop and genuinely compare ourselves to those less fortunate. We overlook the less fortunate thinking there’s nothing we can do to truly help these people, shy of taking care of them ourselves. And yet, who’s to say the difference even a $10 donation could make in someone’s life?

Currently I’m not a part of any activist group but last year after seeing an advertisement for the Raising The Roof campaign, I took it upon myself to buy a $10 winter hat to support helping the homeless during the winter. The campaign was sparked from a national consultation regarding the homeless in Canada showing a great need to reduce these numbers. The actual campaign took off in 1997 and has been progressing ever since. The three goals/strategies to help relieve this dilemma are A) to help fund smaller community homeless programs, B) to bring awareness of the unheard struggles of the homeless and educate methods of prevention and C) to build relationships with people, corporations and other organizations for as much support as possible. Since the start of the Raise the Roof campaign, it has managed to raise over $2.7 million and has gained more than 115 supporting agencies across Canada.

Moving out of a smaller town and into Toronto has opened my eyes in regards to the diversity of the different economic classes of individuals. When I walk down the street and see a man in worn out clothes, searching through the trash next to a Porsche convertible it speaks to my morals saying something isn’t right. I can only further imagine the difficulties homeless people face during the winter, which is why I fully support the Raising the Roof campaign. This year I will play my part in the struggle to help the homeless by once again buying one of their toques (and seeing as how I already have one, I might as well go one step further and give it to someone who needs it). A time may well come when I am able to place more time and effort in this cause, but none the less I feel a $10 donation is, at the least, a step in the right direction.

Works Cited

Raising The Roof. “Our Work.” raisingtheroof.org. N.p., 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.
     <http://www.raisingtheroof.org/au-our-index.cfm>.

I’m already 40 minutes behind because of it. I should be halfway through this blog by now but once again the temptation of Facebook overpowered me. To many times has this exact scenario played out; I’ve finally made it to the library, my stuff’s unpacked and ready to go and almost by second nature I check to see what’s going on in the abyss of ‘the-book’ rather than using my brain cells productively. But then again, who’s to say how useful Facebook is or isn’t? Sure in this case, in regards to blogging, Facebook is a distraction but is Facebook only a distraction? This is what I was told in high school by my teachers but as online social networking and I both mature Facebook is seemingly becoming one of the most popular and widely recognized forms of communication around the world.

It started out, as I recall, with the intention to serve university and college students, allowing them to connect or stay connected with their friends. FB was launched in February, 2004 and since then has acquired over 300 million active users. It has expanded to include over 70 different languages being quite necessary as over 70% of FB users are outside of the U.S. ‘The-book’ was founded by Mark Zuckerberg who, at the time, attended Harvard, and was soon after joined by his classmates Dustin Moskovitz and Chris Hughes. The three dropped out of Harvard to pursue what was now turning into a business, bringing in multi-million dollar endorsement deals within its first year of operation.

My relationship with Facebook is mostly based on it being an easy to use, enjoyable distraction. In fact, about 75% of my time spent on FB is during the time I intended to use to do homework in. Facebook, as one of my professors puts it, is the equivalent of a modern day ‘smoke-break’. What she meant by this is Facebook is somewhere one can go for a 5 or 10 minute break in order to mentally relax before continuing on with work (ha! – if I had the restraint to close FB after 10 minutes my homework would take half the time). Others use Facebook to hold their photos or to upload videos, music etc. while others still, use FB to play online games (though peoples obsession with their virtual farms and what not is beyond me). Facebook is also a great way to spread a message. This is made easier through the use of groups and applications, each of which can be created by users of FB.

Facebook groups are now being advertised all around the internet and even on television. They are being advertised by companies who have realized the potential in setting up groups in Facebook meant for advertising, which makes perfect sense noting the 300 million plus users. As well, Facebook’s current fastest growing demographic is of people 35 years and older. This suggests that Facebook has long since been used solely for the purpose of student communication (maybe I should go back to my high school and tell my teachers to jump on the bandwagon?).

Facebook is growing. Where it is taking us is somewhat unclear but what is clear is that It’s creating a movement in online gatherings and communication. In the 5 years FB has been running it has expanded to include copious amounts of information, activities, media and more giving the impression that it will only continue to get larger. Perhaps someday, maybe not too far from today, will be using Facebook to get our local news or use it for work, but until then I’ll continue to use Facebook the way I’m about to do so; as a distraction.

Works Cited

Facebook. “Press Room – Statistics.” facebook.com. © Facebook , n.d. Web. 22
     Nov. 2009. <http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics>.

Mashable. “Facebook – The Complete Biography.” mashable.com. © Mashable!, 25
     Aug. 2006. Web. 22 Nov. 2009. <http://mashable.com/2006/08/25/
     facebook-profile/>.

Sarcasm – a somewhat appropriate word to describe culture jamming. Satire, irony, parody are all also helpful words possibly used to describe this modern-day phrase, culture jamming. Cultural critic Mark Dery explains culture jamming as the artistic ‘terrorism’ directed against the information society in which we live[1]. The definition given on Wikipedia describes culture jamming as a tactic in which an activist attempts to disrupt or subvert mainstream cultural institutions or corporate advertising[2]. They go on to state that culture jamming is usually employed in opposition to a perceived appropriation of public space, or as a reaction against social conformity. For those of us who still feel a bit left in the dark from these definitions, let me give you the example of John Stewart.

Stewart hosts Comedy Central’s hit program The Daily Show which airs 4 nights a week in the U.S. and Canada[3]. After running for 6 years, Stewart’s show has gained upwards of 1.7 million television viewers, with his episodes also played and viewed online in great numbers. John has acquired such a large audience by simply bringing them their own political news, or at least his version of it (some might say, myself included, he brings a more honest look at our politicians). In TDS, Stewart takes clips of the follys of our politicians and presents the clips as a news anchor. The irony in doing so highlights how our average news media is used to help politics rather than to question and better understand them. If our regular news broadcasts sits at one end of the scrutinizing political spectrum, Stewart surly sits at the other. A fairly good and fairly impressive video visual of culture jamming with Stewart can be seen at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE

John takes it upon himself (very comically I might add) to explain exactly how these hosts of Crossfire have failed to serve America’s interests. This is culture jamming because Stewart plays the role of a traditional news anchor but debates the validity of politicians (and, also, the hosts of Crossfire), something the traditional news anchor would never likely do. Culture jamming is opposing any mainstream idea or practice (in this case, the idea that media represents politics truthfully) but opposing to it by the same means the culture is used to (in this case, John acting as a news anchor fits him in nicely to the ‘media-political culture’).

John Stewart is an excellent example of media based culture jamming but this is not to say all culture jamming is media related. Culture jamming is a tactic that can be used in many ways but its intention is to make people see a concept from another point of view. Where arguing and debating fails by attacking an argument solely head on, culture jamming may help to shed some light on the situation by forcing people to see the argument from another perspective.

 [2] Wikipedia. “Culture jamming.” wikipedia.org. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc, 15 Nov.
     2009. Web. 22 Nov. 2009. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
     Culture_jamming>.

[3] Boler, Megan. “The Transmission of Political Critique after 9/11: “A New Form of Desperation”?.” M/C Journal 9.1 (2006). 24 Nov. 2009 <http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0603/11-boler.php>.

You’re young again. Really young. You’re a child, just waking up on Christmas morning. You run out to the living room and look under the tree and to your delight there’s a new pile of presents wrapped flawlessly with your name on it. You sit down and begin to lift, touch and prod your gifts trying to get any idea of what lies beneath the shielding paper, waiting for your family to join you.  You and your family come together, furiously unwrapping your gifts until each gift has transformed from a present into a Power-Ranger for your brother or a new drill for your dad or a new pair of skates just for you; not the ones you were hoping for, but a better pair than your old ones. You look around and realize every gift has been unwrapped and just like last year the magic of Christmas begins to fade for another 364 days. But this time feels different. As the magic of Christmas begins to leave something more unsettling creeps in to take its place. You look around at the sea of wrapping paper thrown carelessly on the floor. The same paper that 2 hours ago contained imaginable possibilities of happiness, laying there crinkled and exposed. You look at your gifts and the feeling gets worse. You look at your skates but are unsatisfied, the feeling remains strong. You look back at the paper and understand that not only did the gifts you received fall short of your expectations, but you doubt any combination of presents could have lived up to them. The feeling reaches its worst at this point as you begin to dislike yourself and realize the ‘magic’ of Christmas won’t be back next year, or any year for that matter.

Ok, maybe this is a bit of a dramatic way to highlight the problems of over-consumption, but none the less it’s a good scenario to prove the point that money can’t buy happiness. Even if you weren’t taught this important life lesson in the same way chances are you still learned this rule at a young age. This makes me wonder why, then, are companies like Apple, RIM Technology etc. still reaping profits even during an economic struggle? Shouldn’t we have been satisfied with the first iPod or cell phone we got?

Over consumption is influenced by a number of factors, one of them being we as a society like to compete with one and other for ‘the best-of-the-best’ when it comes to just about everything. I might compare it to the same gratification we get when winning at sports. We like winning because it gives us the feeling we are better or more deserving than others. We like to compare ourselves with others and know that we are in a better, more desirable position than they, as it gives us a self-satisfying feeling. This, in my opinion, is one of the most disgusting, ‘un’-humanistic traits in society and yet I continue to follow the trend day by day. This is not to say I get any gratification seeing someone asking for spare change or if I see broken down housing, but unfortunately I would feel jealous if one of my friends were to, say, get a new  flat-screen T.V., as I’m sure they would feel if our roles were reversed. We compare our material goods similarly to sports. If you have the newest, fastest and best, you win, if you have anything but, well at least you’re second with everyone else. How though do we know what to buy? How do some people always stay consistently more fashionable? What constitutes good fashion?

Advertising is another one of the larger factors contributing to over consumption. Advertising is everywhere and therefore influences us all the time. We are constantly seeing logos, listening to commercials and watching advertisements that claim by purchasing these products our lives will suddenly become better and more fulfilled. Their claims work in the sense that for a brief time upon buying their product we become excited and happy to have our new purchase but within time, whether we are exposed to a new, ‘better’ product, if it falters or if the item just loses its appeal, we decide the product is not as good as we first thought and our happiness begins to fade. When this happens we assume the best way to regain our happiness is to once again buy the newest, latest and greatest therefore completing the snowball effect that advertising strives for. On November 27^th (28 in Europe and overseas) people around the world will unite together by saying no to spending money and spreading the word of capitalism and over-consumption. They’ll fight against major corporations by not buying into their advertisements or products and by spreading the word of over consumption – a noble and just cause.  In my opinion however, it would seem nobler message to be sent would not be to discontinue spending, but to be reasonable when spending, thinking of others and to remember to be happy with what we have.

You’re young again. You wake up but lay in bed hating the holidays. ‘Why does it have to be Christmas?’, you wonder. As you get out of bed and put on your old pyjamas you reminisce of the last Christmas, remembering how disappointed your parents were when they could only afford one gift, for you. You know this Christmas will be the same as last and you prepare to act excited, no matter what gift your parents give you. When you manage to make your way out to the tree they’re already there holding a gift for you. As you approach them however you notice two other equally nice looking gifts on the ground. You take your gift enthusiastically but check who the other two are for. Each is signed with carefully written, loving notes addressed to and from your mother and father. You give them each their presents and watch them open them, happier than you can remember.

Works Cited

Adbusters. “Buy Nothing Day.” adbusters.org. N.p., 24 Jan. 2008. Web. 22 Nov.
     2009. <https://www.adbusters.org/about/adbusters>.

We all know how important the internet is. It’s important as a tool for the workplace and important to consumers looking for what they need. The benefits of the internet are passed on to everyone which is why network neutrality is such a concerning topic.

Network neutrality is a rising issue between the business world of our internet service providers (or ISP’s {i.e. Bell, Rogers etc.}), our politics and we, the consumers. Network neutrality refers to our neutral usage rights over the internet, or ‘network’. When we access the internet we are free to browse at our own leisure choosing what sites to visit and how often we visit them, and we’re also able to participate in these websites as we see fit, for free. This is possible largely due to the fact that, aside from the initial connection fee, a website can be made for free, only obligated to finding an untaken domain name. This works in both the consumer’s and producer’s favour as the internet is a fantastic medium to be used as a marketplace for individuals, businesses and/or companies  interested in marketing their information or products. As wonderful as this is, our internet service providers have come to realize that there is money to be made here sparking the debate over network neutrality.

Companies such as Rogers and Bell are, in a sense, the gatekeepers of the internet. They (including all other internet providers – AT&T etc.) and they alone maintain and control our accessibility to the internet. Being the ‘gatekeepers’ of the internet, they are aware of how their customers go about using the internet and hope to use that knowledge to make a profit. Their plan is to charge more popular websites, for example Google or Facebook, a higher price than their competing websites to use the internet with the threat of making these more popular websites slower and more difficult to get through. This would surely only entice these major websites to begin a bidding war for the best connection, following with more general websites soon afterwards. If this is allowed to happen it’s unlikely the general public of the internet will be left unaffected. Though our ISP’s would charge the websites rather than us, the websites would search to find a way to counteract their lost profits, likely charging their users (us) a fee. 

I use the internet every day. My classmates use the internet every day. If you are reading this, I’d be willing to bet you use the internet every day, or at the least enough to sympathize with me when I say the internet should stay free. Network neutrality needs to stay as it is in order for our society and culture to grow. It is our best means of communication between people around the world and, therefore, is being used to bring people together. Not only that, but the internet is growing, more people are logging on and it is giving the unheard voice’s of our world a pedestal to stand up, speak out and interact with the world they belong to and, in reality, belongs to them. It is selfish ideas like that of our Internet Service Providers, to charge favoured websites a higher fee, that place barricades in our world’s progression and will only result in hindering the positive growth we can make with a free marketplace such as the internet.

Works Cited

Wu, Tim. “Why You Should Care About Network Neutrality – The future of the
     Internet depends on it!” slate.com. © Washington Post.Newsweek Interactive
     Co. LLC, 1 May 2006. Web. 21 Nov. 2009. <http://www.slate.com/id/
     2140850/>.

Do you remember Saturday morning cartoons? Do you remember being the first one awake, for once having the freedom to channel surf at your own content? I do. I remember my favourite shows like Recess and The Animaniacs. Even those knock of T.V. shows of movies like Aladdin and 101 Dalmatians were worth a watch (though falling consistently short of my expectations that were based on their feature length films). Being young and naive however, at that point, I never paralleled Recess with the Space Jam pyjamas I would watch it in. Nor did I understand the connection between the programs I watched and the advertisements during commercial breaks selling the newest, must-have Disney toy of the month. Now when I think back I realize that Disney had one of the biggest impacts on my childhood simply because it was always there. A Lion King lunch box here and a Toy Story towel there all added up to substantial profits for Disney from my household alone. Between movies and television shows, Disney’s marketing strategies towards children are precise, relentless and, in a way, unpitying but more concerning is their marketing strategies as a whole.

Disney, along with a very small group of other media corporations, dominate the majority of what we watch (both for entertainment and for news value), what we read (again, both entertainment and news) listen to or, in general, are exposed to through any medium, media related. The top 6 media corporations in the U.S. include General Electric, Disney, News Corp., Time Warner, Viacom and CBS all of which take in an annual revenue of over $10 billion (with General Electric overshadowing even these fiercest competitors with a revenue of $183 billion)[i].  Disney’s revenue is second only to General Electric at $37.8 billion, a number which seems impossible to comprehend. Naturally, this immense amount of money is not made solely from the Saturday morning cartoons I watched religiously, but, the basis of their marketing strategy can be understood through this example. Disney owned the network (ABC Kids), their programs and chose Disney related advertisements. Disney owned just about everything I witnessed during those 4 hours, therefore any profit made was made in Disney’s favour. Disney is able to make so much money because it already owns everything it needs and, equally as important, everything its’ competitors need, giving it security and power. What Disney owns is truly astounding. A small summary begins with the ABC Television Network and other cable networks (ESPN, Family Channel, A&E Television, SOAPnet etc.), 277 radio stations, theme parks around the world, music and book publishing companies and production companies such as Miramax Pixar Animation Studios, Touchstone and others.

By having its hand in all of these corporations, Disney has committed the foul of cross-media ownership. This means Disney, from its start as a cartoon production company, has now expanded to include just about every other form of media and by doing so to such a colossal extent, have now prevented other companies from even the possibility of making higher profits than them (minus General Electric). Think of it this way, at this point, if Disney starts loosing profits from their television series due to a large new reading demographic, they’d be left unconcerned as profits in their book publication agencies would soon rise. Or, say radio sales began to slump. Disney could easily take its time deciding the best course of action by simply falling back on the prodigious revenue made by its movies. By monopolizing all of these media production agencies and companies under the Disney name, it has created unbreakable security for itself. This also means that the large majority of media profits go to Disney (as well as the few other major corporations) which leads to the majority or the wealth staying in these companies and out of the pockets of its consumers.

Though Disney’s image may not have changed in the last 10 years, the light in which I see them has flipped 180 degrees. In my opinion Disney is a relentless, fraudulent business hiding behind the cheerful laugh and smile of a cartoon mouse set on only one motif, to build profits. This speaks to Disney’s integrity (or what’s left of it) showing it has long since been in the media business with the main intention of making kids laugh.

The internet is a marketplace. Think about it, try and imagine something you can’t get on the internet. The day has come when it is very uncommon for any company not to have some form of catalogue, or at the least a description of their business, on the internet. This includes everything from local businesses to outlet stores, from grocery stores to just about any product sold within a grocery store. Yes, just about anything can be found on the internet, including, more recently, up to date news brought to us by average people around the world.

As the internet becomes more accessible to the world, more and more people are able to connect with each other, sharing their thoughts, opinions, ideas etc. One of the more interesting concepts, I find, that has been amplified by the internet is citizen journalism. Citizen journalism is the idea of everyday people reporting any local story they deem, newsworthy. Citizen journalism is important because their work isn’t filtered. Unlike major news corporations, average people have nothing at stake but their own reputation. They don’t have to worry about what their boss thinks when writing a blog or posting a video. They therefore contribute solely  for their own purposes and, hopefully, for the purpose of spreading truthful knowledge between one and other.

It is safe to say the internet has grown vastly, if not the most it ever has, in the last 10 years. With the creation of Facebook, chat rooms, Youtube, blogging sites and more, we have been given access to (quite literally) a world of information. These mediums are perfect for average people to connect and receive unbiased opinions and news stories from each other. Think back even 5 years ago. You may have gotten your news from a newspaper or waited until the 7 o’clock news to come on TV. Today you may do the same thing, but that newspaper has an up-to-date, free website and the 7 o’clock news is now showing clips from Youtube.

I believe this trend is going to continue. People will always look for the quickest, effortless way of attaining what they need. Also, one can usually get whatever information they need for free on the internet, making it that much more enticing. It is difficult to map the route will take in regards to the internet and our use of it, but I have no doubt this road leads to a wider spread of users and, therefore, a wider spread of truthful, unbiased communication.

Works Cited

“Citizen journalism.” Wikipedia. 29 Sept. 2009. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.. 13 Oct. 2009.

                <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism>

It’s gotten to the point, or seems to me anyways, that every other show on television features a group of people, thrown into a ridiculous environment and filmed, only to produce the same, mind-numbing results. Reality TV exists on just about every station but I wonder, why does reality seem to always end up so.. unrealistic? Is it crazy to think strangers might be able to get along on even one of the, I can only assume, thousands of so called reality programs? As of now I’ve yet to come across one, which makes me think the name of these shows should be changed from reality TV (ridiculous reality, retarded reality –  I’ve got plenty!).

Let’s be honest though, it doesn’t take a genius to realize the producers of reality shows go to great extents in order to find the most entertaining applicants. In other words, applicants that are beautiful, and problematic. Being media literate is being able to make the distinction between reality and fiction. It means to deconstruct any form of media in order to learn the motifs of its producers. The motifs of any television producer are to entertain as many people as possible, which usually leads to a group of unbalanced individuals living together. To be media literate, one must be sceptical of any and all media until they understand the source of the media and the intention.

Being that the media is all around us, I feel that not enough people are media aware or media literate. Because media is constantly in our sight and in our ears, we tend to begin accept what it is we are being told or, at the least, let our guard down. This is what advertising companies strive for. Advertisements will often have a play on words or may use imagery to give a false impression of their product. Their goal is to stretch the truth as much as possible in order to make us believe we need what they’re selling more than we do.

Are you media literate? Here’s a test..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBfi8OEz0rA

I remember this commercial from my childhood but the message is still relevant in today’s society. If the end of this video didn’t give it away (you probably weren’t watching), the commercial was a spoof. The intention was to make the audience question what was happening and hopefully come to the conclusion (before it was given away) that there is no such thing as a ‘house hippo’.

In our world, a world that is continuously leaning more and more on the media as a source of entertainment and information, we must be sure to always decipher between reality and fiction. Go with your gut, if an advertisement seems too good to be true it probably is. Heck, if they were I’d be 200 pounds of muscle, the world would consist of only easy, beautiful women and I wouldn’t get along with any of my roommates.

Works Cited

Youtube. “The North American House Hippo.”

                Accessed October 12^th, 2009.

                <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2C2deHWGgoc>

It’s everywhere. It comes in all different colors, shapes and sizes. It can be discrete or unmistakeable. It’s as much a part of our lives as the news we read, the radio we listen to and the programs we watch. Give up? Advertising has come to be as much a part of our lives as media, such as television and the internet, has. Have you ever stopped and looked at the trends of advertising? They come and go depending on the state of our society. For example, companies today seem to be rallying their advertisements around the concept of a greener earth. They highlight how we as consumers would be giving back to the environment by choosing their product over the competition.

One trend that seems to have stuck however has been summarized into two words and is known all over the media. This phrase which we’ve all heard to an exhausting extent is ‘sex sells’! We see a beautiful, half naked couple and become transfixed, if just for a moment. We know we want to emulate the couple, both their appearance and the physical act in which they’re taking part in, which makes us vulnerable. Vulnerable to helpful printed suggestions such as ´The Fragrance of Men´, which are often overlooked at first due to the ad itself.

The best selling, sex incorporated ads are ones that push the limits of what our society views as acceptable. This is because A) they’ll always catch our attention first, before a less sexier ad and B) it makes people believe with the given product they’ll be that much closer to taking part in the act of sex themselves. This immediately makes me think of the word controversy. How far are companies willing to go to sell their products? How risqué can ads become without offending their customers? Are there limitations to what can be placed in advertising in this situation? Keeping this in mind, I give you one of the latest, most controversial ads I’ve ever seen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQI1tzkwpkI

So, what did you think? Do the ends justify the means? The ad gives us no clue as to what it’s supporting until the very end. Breast cancer is a sincere, significant issue in our lives but should it use Aliya- Jasmine’s bouncing, bare (minus the tiny bikini) breasts as a medium to send this message? The ad without doubt caught and kept the attention of its viewers, making it successful, but is it disrespectful to women?

John Berger goes into detail in his book Ways of Seeing on how women have learned to view themselves through men’s eyes. He explains this most accurately through his example of oil paintings. Men, in the days when oil paintings were the predominant method of saving an image, would have the women they loved (or at least married) pose nude to be painted. This showed the authority of a man and turned women into possessions to be owned.

In regards to the ad, I don’t feel as if Jasmine is flaunting her breasts in a way suggesting she can be owned. The fact that the ad supports the fight against breast cancer tells us she supports fighting this disease as well, and therefore supports women. Sex will always be a good way to catch our societies attention and when it comes down to the issue of many people suffering from breast cancer, I would say getting people’s attention, by whatever means, is worth doing. Besides, who doesn’t mind seeing some nice curves every once in awhile!

Works Cited

Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation and Penguin Books, 2008.

In my opinion, defining the mass media is like trying to learn every constellation with a single glance at the stars.  Placing any definition on this term may give one a clouded interpretation of what the mass media is but to fully understand this concept one must deeper explore the media. To begin, let’s ask the obvious.

What is media?

Media is any form of information, ranging from photos, journals, songs, news articles etc. that is communicated between two parties. It’s purpose for being communicated is to take a message along with it. Whether the message has significance or not, it is important to understand that media has the ability to change us, and in effect change the world.

The first evidence of change was brought about by one of (if not the most) important forms of media; The Alphabet. The phonetic alphabet became universally accessible after the invention of the printing press in the 1400’s. This lead to complete cultural change as Western European society was then able to spread knowledge much more efficiently between each other giving everyone an equal chance to become learned. Mcluhan was one of the first to explore the relationship between the alphabet and cultural progression. The basis of Mcluhan’s argument was that the alphabet began a new visual era, leading away from the previous, oral era. In other words, people were now capable of learning new information on their own by reading, opposed to having to been told directly.

Both the alphabet and the idea of storing information in media have lead to one of the greatest contributors to the mass media that the world has ever known. We know this medium as the internet. The internet is beginning to deliver us every form of media (as a matter of fact, it’s delivering you this post right now!). If information can be written, photographed or recorded it can be placed on the internet making it accessible for anyone in the world to see. This is the mass media.

The internet is shrinking our world. It should be clear that it is not doing so on a physical scale, but rather in the sense that we now have instant access to news events in England, Australia or China. We can talk to relatives living on the other side of the world with a simple click of the mouse. It’s turning our world into less of an entire globe and more into a complete global village (Mcluhan). We’re beginning to have access to other countries’ products and shared information making the whole world within reach.

After going over media and it’s significance, we’re still left with the question, what is the mass media? The mass media is the combination of all available media. It is information given out on a large scale affecting a wide range people. It varies from written works to songs, pictures to videos, brochures to newspapers and much more. The mass media is all around us and will continue to grow with the development of our society simply in order to accommodate for the progression of the world.

Works Cited

“The Playboy Interview: Marshall McLuhan.” Playboy Magazine. March 1969.

                Web. 10 Oct. 2009.

                <http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~gisle/links/mcluhan/pb.html>