This week we showed our rough cut audio essays to Rachel and got some helpful feedback.
Some of the things we needed to improve on:
Be more direct- no characters or faking it.
We were told that with audio it becomes very obvious if someone is pretending to play a part and our voices easily give away the fact that it is stages or just too contrived. When we were more direct and said things as we thought of them the audio essay seemed more authentic and engaging despite it being planned out.
2. Have more layers
We should start thinking about different effects like music. We are thinking about making it a radio show and play the end of a song to introduce us.
3. focus on WHY kpop is an institution.
This has been challenging to do because the definition of an institution is hard to pin down and recontextualize to a modern music industry. We’ve decided to stick with our definition. I’m going to say:
Business Studies Research-Professor Geoffrey Martin Hodgson, in his descriptive text ‘What are Institutions’ 2006, explores just that.
He states that an ‘institution’ is a sociological term that usually connotates a relationship between a dominant social power, certain conventions and behaviours over a passive and abiding collectivist community.
There was a last minute call from my pal Jenny to be a part of her group’s film as an extra. Based off experience with highschool media being an extra always fun. This was first time (I’ve been quite anti-social) that joined an unknown group to help with their work and it was fantastic! They were organised, decisive and very friendly to everyone there. Their short film is about a nerdy loser (his words not mine) who finds it difficult to socialise but comes alive because of his love for the band Space Monkeys. We as extras had the vital and excruciatingly challenging role of appearing to be a squad of bustling hipsters in line for one of the beloved indie rock band’s concerts. Today I learned from students in media 3 (3 times as good as media obviously) to keep the crew relaxed and natural for the best effect. In the end they just let us talk in line about whatever came to mind instead of telling us to “act normal,” which would not have gotten the same results.
The posters were too new looking so we had to wear down the posters with coffee and tearing.
make an email bank with templates- pre written responses to available
keep a good work ethic and attitude: people are looking for those who respond quickly and are conscientious. You don’t have to be brash and out going extrovert. But communication is important.
try to expand your network: work attachment with a relative is ok but how will it benefit you?
send concise short emails
use online resources to write a good CV then send it off to a human
Watching the video essay video again was very inspiring.
It got us talking about how we want to present our video essay. We decided that we are going to split up our audio and video essay not by topic but by approach. I think it might work out because we are using the mediums to their advantage. Our grand plan is to focus on the individual affect kpop has on its fans and what people think of it. And for the video we will take a step back and look at the broader picture of its holistic effect on countries and industries particularly clothes, make up etc
We hope this idea will work. The audio will be best for personal conversations between the host and guests allowing their perspectives to be expressed.
While in the video powerful imagery of churches, crowds, in sync dancing etc will visually send the message of unity and how kpop is an institution.
“It’s just a prank bro.” Is a common term used by idiots who seek to gain credibility at the cost of other people’s daily life. We see millions of prank videos on Youtube and granted some of them are good natured. But most have started a dangerous trend that allow people to take things too far. It is even more disturbing to see that the pranks that “go wrong” gain even more views and in a way encourage more violence disrespect in public.
An interesting phenomenon in ads has taken place and that is prank videos. For some reason we just enjoy seeing each other get scared and shocked. The people in the ad who find themselves in front of crocodile interior are undoubtably paid actors. But does it matter? People will believe what they want to and there isn’t enough time for deep contemplation when it comes to this sensationalist ads. And nowadays arguably there is no such thing as bad publicity. It brings up questions of ethics especially with trickery and privacy.
On the flip side an ad that does very well to get a good message out to the public using a similar “prank” technique” has emerged from this somewhat rude trend.
I went to a suprise screening Silence of the Lambs (1991) and it was absolutely thrilling. Before the screening we had no idea what we were in for. They immerse us in the world of the film before revealing to us what it was through setting and acting of the common lounge area. Actors had been hired to walk around the area looking important and muttering hurriedly in American accents.
Watching Silence of the Lambs made me realise the power of creating a great memorable character. I never thought of myself to be a “slasher film” kind of person when my friends excitedly said, “don’t worry you’ll love it!” But this film was so different from what I originally thought. I loved how we watched Clarice grow as a person.
Anthony Hopkin’s screen presence was outstanding, everytime he spoke I would hold my breath and get shivers at his delivery.
In this lectorial we talked about institutions and how they implement themselves in our society. Focussing on marriage as an institution has made me question the things I’ve been told about it already. As it turns out marriage is not about love.
Recently my cousin got married, the wedding was beautiful and of course so was the bride. I watched as the crowd lined up to sign custom made wedding photobooks. Perhaps I’m rude for even wondering but why do people spend so much on their weddings days? Surely if its the “happiest day of your life” it would be just as nice going out for a cute picnic with the family and having a dressed down bbq. At least that’s what I would do. When I go to weddings I find myself secretly estimating the cost of catering and decor and wondering why? Is marriage for the couple or for the show? Either way it feels like an obligation to create highly stylised, sophisticated weddings nowadays. Modern couples higher photographers and at the wedding I went to there was a professional film made during the day and shown that very night at the reception. Couples are finding new ways to get creative to make their wedding the most aesthetically pleasing day of their lives.
Weddings have a striking influence in pop culture inspiring a countless array of rom coms.
And in all of them, getting married seems to be a women’s ultimate goal and often the 30-something-year old feels that the world has ended if the heavenly gates of marriage threaten to close on them; banishing them to singleton island.
Generally wedding flicks seem to focus on the woman but in the past that was hardly the case.
I’m sure we’d all like to see marriage as a beautiful covenant of love and romance. Marriage ceremonies from a historical perspective show that they really had nothing to do with love, let alone equality. Marriage as an institution developed principally out of political and economic needs; the protection of assets; exchange of wealth; a geographical foothold, even! Whether or not the two people would even get alone was totally irrelevant. Sadly, love-marriages happened to just a lucky few.
Marriage used to be a business deal between the father of the bride and the groom. The standard father daughter walk down the aisle then the traditional placement of the daughters hand into the grooms by the father symbolises the long sexist history.
Maybe one day I can add my own flare to a wedding through the trimmings of the placemats of the reception but for now I’m hoping to live with 7 cats and own an ice cream business alone in the outback.
David Morley (2005), Entry on ‘Audience’ in New Keywords: A Revised Vocabulary of Culture and Society, Ed. T.Bennett, L. Grossberg & M. Morris (Wiley-Blackwell), pp.8-10.
The article states that with new audience research we have stopped seeing audiences as one passive entity to be controlled by the media. Particularly when it comes to being influenced to behave in certain ways. I’ve found that powerful media can still have an influence on my actions when it is meaningful and clever enough. When it comes to safety, the government has issues a number of very impactful ads. Transport Accident Commission campaigns always strike a chord with me because they are so relatable. What makes them powerful is their ability to lull you into a false sense of security and then allow you to place yourself in the situation they show. The scary “this could be you if you’re not careful” idea is indeed very memorable.
This ad takes a different approach by removing the driving and focussing on the family part. Its a beautiful piece that takes the seat belt and replaces it with the metaphor of a family’s embrace of safety. His wife and daughters arms across his chest and around his hips create an undeniable resemblance to the seatbelt. The slow motion enhances our longing for him to stop crashing to his death as we watch his family rush forward.
The idea of how printing allowed audiences to change by dispersing content across not only space- but also time makes me think about what will happen to our grandkids and our own facebook posts. Without knowing it i’ve already set up my own online “life book” where I’ll be easily traceable from my date of birth to my embarrassing year 8 emo phase photos.
The “active audience” theories empower audiences with a new found digital voice. The vlogging phenomenon on youtube has propelled ordinary people to internet fame making them a hybrid media consumer and maker. Although we as consumers have ability to post more things online, our opinions are still filtered through the edited and well refined structures of mainstream social media. For example, facebook takes the knowledge of social conventions and transforms it into their own version of online courtesy. This is especially prevalent with the “birthday posts” it is now considered abnormal to not receive a flood of posts on your birthday congratulation you on achieving yet another full year of life. People count these posts and measure it against their self worth, even calculating the length of the post against the closeness of the person posting it.
It has come to the point where facebook reminds me “hey hey Vanessa say happy birthday to this friend you haven’t talked to for 3 years make their day! Or are you just an lonesome asshole?”
Either way almost everyone falls into the birthday guilt trap. We have to ask ourselves, are we doing it because we want to or because the media wants us to?
Jay Rosen (2006),’The People Formerly Known as the Audience’, PressThink blog, June 27.
I found this article very useful in reflecting on how nowadays the relationship between media producers and consumers have become blurred. We are now in an information age where the mouthpiece for society is passed around like a communal joint and when someone makes a good point we all nod and move on.
As someone who grew up with the internet readily available I had never really thought of myself as an pure audience member whose role only consisted of consuming. I like to think of the modern relationship between maker and consumer as a sushi train restaurant. Each dish (media texts) move around the tasters (audience) on a mini train creating a constant stream of interesting visually delectable platters. The ever moving train (our news feeds) allows us to see a wide spread of food BUT we are the ones with the power to consume, and in turn recommend what we eat. In a way the eaters have the most power as we are the ones who decide what becomes popular. Naturally the most favoured dishes disappear quickly and this high demand is noticed by the chefs who then create more of that popular dish. This can explain maybe we there are so many damn superhero movies at the moment.
Also without audiences nothing goes viral which means The Ellen show has no viral videos to feature.
Vsauce one of my favourite youtubers investigated the history of clapping; why we do it, what it means and how its meaning has changed over time. I think that if we look at the history of clapping; an activity originally used to show curtesy and appreciation of a live act, we can track the shift in power in the media.
He says that clapping is a “a collective social gesture which we in groups to express admiration.” People used to have to see orchestras play music live in order to appreciate their favourite symphonies; but now with recorded music its so much easier to become an audience of one. With more entertainment than ever and technology that allows us to “cacoon” our consumption of it in solitude it would seem like our ability to “clap” as a crowd would diminish. But to me that is far from the truth.
A highly centralized media system had connected people “up” to big social agencies and centers of power but not “across” to each other. Now the horizontal flow, citizen-to-citizen, is as real and consequential as the vertical one.
Instead of applauding in real life in substitution we have accumulative liking, sharing and commenting on content online. As Michael says, we create a “digital applause” as an ersatz applause.
I realise that this is a terrible photo and the sign across the train tracks is barely visible. But this is exactly what is bothering me. I love ads sometimes even they they just want my money but this Spec savers board has me squinting. As someone who is short sighted I already find it hard to read big billboards. The only way I could read that poster was when I asked my friend what it said (we were very very bored). You’d think that an ad company selling sight to the foggy -visioned would make their advertising a little clearer.
