Authenticity |
 |
The word authenticity has cropped up in most of our classes this semester, for example when we were dealing with “shady CEOs” and their methods for concealing unpleasant truths; the “Ivy League spirit” and the assumed value of an elitist (not necessarily brilliant) education; of the pros and cons of Michael Moore, who “edits” truth for his own gain (plus maybe more excusable reasons); women in the media and how it is important whether Hillary Clinton really cried or was cleverly faking it to appear more “womanly”. This leads to the question whether authenticity in the modern media-oriented world is something we can still achieve and should aim for, or whether we have to admit that it is the image which decides. Perhaps media people are right to fool us, since that seems to be what we want...
A blog, short for web log, is a website maintained by an individual, often connected with a newspaper or a website community, who provides his/her readers with (personal) commentaries or news and is interlinked with other websites; internet users can respond to the commentaries, participating in lively internet dialogs. Bloggers (people who write blogs) seem to be ahead of mainstream media lately because of their forthright, topical discussion of prickly topics. Both this and the popularity of blogs (according to washingtonpost.com, the expansion rate of monthly visitors to bloggers.com increased by 528 percent between February 2005 and February 2008) foreshadow that the face of mass media will continue to become more and more interactive in the coming years. The economic relevance of blogs lies in the seemingly infinite possibilities for direct contact between the author and the audience.
Today casting is everywhere. It starts with all those shows on television, like Germany’s Next Topmodel or Deutschland sucht den Superstar, and ends on the internet with castings for TV spots, like the “Big Mac Casting” that McDonalds has started on YouTube. Usually the audience determines the winner. Casting seems to enable everyone, no matter from which socio-economic background or geographical location, to attempt to become famous, no matter how trivial the task. The idea of making common people famous is not only a real catcher for all those sitting in front of TV or computer wishing to appear on stage themselves one day, but also for the companies which are offering castings. Through casting ‘nobodies’ rather than some famous person, they save money for their TV ads, for example, and gain even more attention by advertising the casting for it. The extensive interaction with the television spectators or the internet users multiplies the advertising effect, which continues in the follow-up reactions in countless blogs. Cheap and involving – the perfect format!
The notion of a “documentary” has considerably changed in recent years. Whereas a clear-cut definition has always been difficult, the one essential criterion generally agreed upon is that it needs to depict reality. Nowadays, the likes of Michael Moore have reinvented this very concept. Films like Bowling for Columbine (2002), An Inconvenient Truth (2006) or Manufacturing Dissent (2007) are actually on the edge of what can be accepted as a documentary. In order to convey their respective messages, some of the producers impart only a fragmentary, subjective image of reality, arranging alleged facts in a biassed manner by means of quoting out of context or, as it seems, even by exerting direct influence on the development of some scenes. Therefore, a term like “docuganda” (a combination of “documentary” and “propaganda”) might appear more appropriate here. Regardless of all good intentions – selling a subjective picture of reality as objective is always dangerous.
File sharing is a way to “obtain” files based on peer-to-peer networks. Users can release files such as music, movies, applications, software on their server for other people to download. It is common that people both upload and download files. In order to gain access to those peer-to-peer networks it is necessary to install special computer programs. File sharing is, of course, detested by the music and entertainment industry since it makes their sales decrease. But file sharing seems to be more popular than ever because it keeps becoming easier and faster. For that reason, the Recording Industry Association of America has started to offer several download platforms as alternatives to peer-to-peer file sharing, permitting downloading under several restrictions.
“Remarkable”? Glass Ceiling and Pink Collar Ghetto
The term “glass ceiling” refers to the instances in which an educationally qualified person is not able to climb the ladder, to go further in his/her professional career due to discrimination. The reasons for discrimination are unwritten, invisible borders, such as being a woman or a member of a minority. These borders are evident without being officially recognized within a company. That is why they are referred to as “glass,” which is invisible. “Ceiling” indicates the obstruction of the professional advancement.
The term “pink collar ghetto” refers to jobs which are mainly held by women and therefore considered ‘female’. Pink collar ghetto usually has negative connotations, implying that women are only employed in a restricted number of jobs and are not able to work successfully in jobs traditionally held by men. Counterexamples are Oprah Winfrey, Condoleeza Rice and Hillary Clinton. On her concession speech on June 7, 2008, Clinton exclaimed: “Although we weren’t able to shatter that highest, hardest glass ceiling this time, thanks to you, it’s got about 18 million cracks in it.” Although she lost to Obama in the primary elections, she pioneered in American society/politics. As Clinton herself stated, one day soon it will be “unremarkable to think that a woman can be the President of the United States. And that is truly remarkable.“
The period of the Presidential election is always quite a heated time, especially when it comes to fundraising. The candidates are trying their best to obtain as much money as possible for their campaigns. They have a number of sources they can draw on in order to finance their campaigning, above all the individual contributions, as well as PAC contributions (Political Action Committees), candidate self-financing, matching Federal Funds and other revenues like loans from outside sources. As the law directs, all the names of the donors that have contributed to the fundraising necessarily have to be reported and collected.
If candidates decide to run a campaign entirely on private funds there is no limitation on fundraising. But if they accept public funding there is a limitation of $84 million. Barack Obama is the first candidate who has based his campaign solely on private funds since Watergate (1970s). His slogan of “CHANGE” and his savvy internet fundraising strategies attracting individual contributors have assured him widespread support.
No, this is not an allusion to the O2 mobile phone provider. In this case, the term O2 refers to Barack Obama (the first “O”), the Democratic candidate for the presidential elections in 2008, and the very popular and influential talk show host Oprah Winfrey (the second “O”), who decided to support Obama actively and publicly. Together the two Chicago residents received wide media coverage of their joint appearances during the primary election campaign in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina. Oprah assisted Obama through speeches to large audiences, YouTube videos, internet statements and a major fundraising campaign. Never before has she actively intervened in politics, and therefore her endorsement of Obama as the best candidate seems credible.
But there was a risk for Oprah in the concept of O2 since it altered the reputation she had built up throughout the years. The popularity rating of her show, for example, dropped from 61 % to 55 % because not all of her viewers – especially lower middle-class women who supported Hillary Clinton – share Winfrey’s political opinion. Nevertheless, the O2 strategy, which resulted in high media profile for Obama, may have been decisive in his successful bid for the votes and monetary contributions of the Democratic party members.
In the general buzz about Web 2.0, another expression is frequently heard: social networking. Unlike blogs, where people connect and interact because of similar interests and their desire to discuss the blog’s topic, social networking sites such as Facebook bring people together on a much more general level: anyone, mostly students, can contact their (old) friends via Facebook, add them to a list, and stay in touch with them this way. They can also see who their friends know, often finding that they happen to know the same people, connecting with them as well, thus creating a complex social network. But, like any big community, be it virtual or real, social networking sites are a threat to individual privacy, the best example being the photos of a partying Hugh Grant in various Facebook photo galleries, which are another major feature of the site. You may be transparent, but the way Facebook’s administrators make a profit is not. So beware: your participation in the popular site is benefiting someone financially.
The term describes a process of marketing based on new forms of “word of mouth” strategy. It is named viral marketing, because it spreads like a virus when it is done properly. The company or individual that wants to sell its product uses its consumers as marketing tools. This usually happens via internet blogs and social networking platforms. The consumer recommends the product to others, thereby expanding its scope and increasing its clientele.
The principle of viral marketing provides several advantages for those who want to sell their product. Not only does it hand over the actual promotion work to the customers, but it is also cheaper than regular advertising strategies and contributes to the credibility of the product. However, viral marketing also bears some risks, since it cannot be controlled easily. Therefore a strict surveillance of the campaign’s development is obligatory.
With the growing presence of the internet and its many online community sites, viral marketing has become indispensable for marketers. The most recent example would be Mr. Obama’s Democratic primary campaign. Besides raising money for his presidential race on his website, he also benefited from internet communities like Facebook or MySpace and hence reached a new, young electorate.
Which of these terms do you think should win the prize for the "word of summer 2008"? Send your choice to waegner@anglistik.uni-siegen.de.