reflection

media is everywhere... and pretty much everyone is exposed to it. i think doing these blogs has helped me become more aware of the subtle or not-sosubtle messages different forms of media portray to their audience. being more media literate has definitely made changes in the ways i see things on tv, the radio, and my phone. with both these changes, i still heavily consume media everyday...this past week i have been on my phone for an average of 5 hours and 44 minutes a day. that doesn't include the music i listen to or the amount of tv i watched. last saturday i spent 7 hours on my phone....thats so sad considering that's almost as long as i sleep for.... this intense amount of media consumption has basically taken over my life (mostly negatively). like what was shown on missrepresentation, media is a root cause for many body insecurities that people face. so the more media i consume, the more stereotypical tropes i see.

 although i did not decrease my media consumption, i did become more aware and focused on what media tries to portray. for example, i look at certain colors, music, and people in different advertisements to see what the brand is trying to sell. i think it is very important to have media literacy to know if a company is trying to sell you a product or the supposed lifestyle that comes with joining the bandwagon. knowing the different techniques and tricks companies use is helpful so you won't fall into their advertising trap.

overall, i enjoyed keeping a blog this semester since it allowed me to express my opinions on things that are relevant and it made me dig deeper on media consumption. keeping this blog was also pretty fun since i got to speak casually on subjects. i now feel more knowledgeable and aware of the media we are surrounded in.

missrepresentation :(

growing up, it was made clear by media that females are to look a certain way or else they're not pretty enough. i remember i didn't know how to fake smile for a school picture when i was in kindergarten or first grade, and the photographer was telling me to smile for him "like a barbie or bratz doll"...at the time i had no idea what that meant, but it is quite shocking that he would compare a 5 or 6 year old to a 20-something year old barbie doll. if i'm growing up surrounded by sexualization and objectification of girls, it is no surprise that i am insecure about my physical appearance, making me apart of the 78% of girls by 17 that are unhappy with their bodies. 

media portray women as basically nothing but a sex object to appeal to (mostly) men, which is apart of the huge problem. "men love boobs until they're used for their actual purpose". media has sexualized natural body parts like boobs to the point where we almost forget their actual purpose. breastfeeding in public is still a big taboo. there are many products where their goal is to make this natural process as discreet as possible. what is wrong with a mother feeding her baby? 

i think women are also apart of the problem... "girls support girls" is an untrue saying in today's society. girls are quick to judge other girls, even though they are insecure themselves. it's like a loop. when media pushes beauty standards onto their audience, those standards are practically ingrained. people feel insecure when they don't meet these high standards. these insecure people feel bad about themselves, so let's talk about that person over there who also is "ugly". 

as much as it hurts females, i think media also has a negative effect on males. parallel to the helpless dumb blonde, there is the super buff aggressive dude. when guys grow up seeing only this as a representation of what a man should be and act like, they are likely going to also feel the societal standards. and if men in media is shown to objectify women, can we guess what male audience members are going to think about women? 

media's reputation has once again been shattered by the misrepresentation of both females and males.

 

"social media seriously harms your mental health"

in the past couple of months, iv'e seen this quote plastered on phone cases on instagram (the irony). i found out that this phone case is made by a brand called "urban sophistication". they make apparel and phone cases that use pop culture to display the negative effects of being online.

here are some products i found the most relevant to what we talked about in class

this phone case includes the classic "social media seriously harms your mental health" and a medicine label that implies that likes on social media is what people use as a "loneliness reliever depression reducer". i like how they used satire to execute the message that focusing on getting likes is the cause of poor mental health such as anxiety and depression. it's clever to use a medication label bc the way i see it, striving for a certain amount of likes is addictive. i was curious about the simple black and white design for the social media label, and i found out that this is based on a cigarette pack health warning label that says "smoking seriously harms you and others around you".

i think this design would appeal to the growing teenage and young adult audience that is realizing that social media does harm their mental health. i find it interesting and kinda ironic that people that buy this case most likely still heavily use social media and focus on likes....




this phone case has a expiration date label that is found on food items. the label says "best before sep 2018 iphone release". the clear case with the simple sticker makes it seem like the sticker is directly stuck onto the phone. this is a tease for people who care about getting the newest and latest technology. even though their iphone 8 is still working fine and is practically the same as the iphone x, they want the iphone x to get that “dual optical image stabilization" instead of the lame "optical image stabilization". the average person doesn't even know what that means (unless im dumb and everyone knows what that means). people who buy the new iphone just for the heck of it are probably people who buy apple's lifestyle not the actual product. 

back

front

this is a sweatshirt that focuses on product placement. the description for this shirt on the brand's website says "Product Placement is a visualization of social media's commercial potential. Rather than limiting the sponsored content to the logo space, the entire sweatshirt is divided into several advertising spaces". urban sophistication speaks on the commercialization and capitalistic values of companies. on the back of the shirt, there is a definition of product placement, which we talked about in class for a little bit. it's embedding advertisement in things like the background of tv sets, music videos, instagram posts, and of course, clothes. the front of the sweatshirt just has advertising for advertising. there are two signs that say "YOUR AD HERE" and one that says "ADVERTISING SPACE AVAILABLE", all with the stereotypical phone number to call, dimensions, etc. this shirt brings awareness to people who are oblivious to the product placement in the tv shows and movies they watch and how it can affect what consumers want.


i really like this company and their many relevant messages about media and how they use pop culture references to convey these messages. on the urban sophistication website, the founders say that they "offer a way to perceive the fantasy we live in, without changing anything about it", which i think they do a good job doing. when i first heard of their brand a few months ago, i saw that they had an instagram which is ironic considering the messages they send out. but now their account is gone, so i guess they took their own advice. 

https://urbansophistication.boutique

natural makeup! (except it covers your acne, birthmarks, and any imperfection)

"guys like girls with natural makeup or no makeup at all"

there is so many things wrong with this statement. it makes so many assumptions. not all guys like girls. and who is speaking for ALL the guys in the world? why should girls control what they do with their face based on what guys prefer?

i've seen so many videos about "natural makeup" but it covers any blemishes, acne, scarring, pretty much anything that doesn't make you skin completely smooth and "perfect". this ultimately implies that any blemishes is not natural and should be covered up. these "natural" makeup routines take just as much product as "glam" makeup.

here is a list of product a youtuber used in her video "HOW TO EASY EVERYDAY MAEKUP TUTORIAL-Fresh and Natural!"
Mac Fix+ Matte It Cosmetics Anti Aging Armor Dior BB Eye Cream Tarte Shape Tape concealer Bare Minerals Matte Foundation powder Tarte Park Avenue Princess palette Hourglass Diffused Bronze Light Becca Champagne Pop highlighter Essence Satin Coral Blush Benefit Precisely My Brow Pencil Hourglass brow gel Anastasia Pro Pencil Hourglass Caution Mascara Mac Oh Honey lip pencil Mac Boldly Bare lip pencil Tom Ford First Time lipstick the Dior Lip Glow

this, in my opinion, isn't really "natural". there is nothing wrong with wearing makeup but people who prefer "natural" makeup or no makeup are really just preferring this. the youtuber covers all her freckles and lines her lips to make them look bigger. she even uses "anti aging" cream that is supposed to minimize wrinkles, so apparently aging and wrinkles aren't natural.

the problem with "natural" makeup is the fact that it implies that certain things like acne should be covered to even be considered natural. it preaches to people that their birthmarks, blemishes, etc should be hidden or you're not natural.

an article similar to this blogpost
https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2016/mar/23/men-women-less-makeup-bad-research

do we control media or media control us?

while watching frontline's making cents out of teens: merchants of cool, we noticed the marketing feedback loop. companied research teens and every aspect of their lives and then advertise their lifestyle back to teens. teens aspire to reach that lifestyle, reach it, media takes over, and it's not cool anymore. then teens find something new. then companies come flocking back. this is the everlasting cycle and the reason why trends come and go so quickly. so do we teens really control what we like? or does media tell us what to like?

before media became our main source for inspiration for clothing, beauty standards, and an overall lifestyle, people used their peers (at least that's what i think). as teens got more power and money to spend, companies took the chance of advertising for teens. as the years went on, as media played a bigger role in teen life, teens began seeing teens represented. except these teens look prettier than you! and they have expensive cars! you're not cool if you don't look like them! teenagers then change to fit these standard of living. but mainstream = not cool, so when too many people start dressing like sharpie from high school musical, it's time to move on to something different and unique. here comes disney channel again on its way to make a movie about edgy outcasts. and this whole thing restarts. it's kinda crazy how what teens want, we get.

i don't think that this feedback loop is just for companies advertising their product, but it spreads to social media like tumblr,  instagram, and pinterest. "influencers" inspire their followers by showing off their lavish lifestyle with their cars and clothing. when all people see is success in materialistic items, it is no doubt they will feel insecure that they don't have what others do. this is the same for beauty standards...people just can't help but compare their bodies to someone else's. so people would change themselves to attempt to fit these artificial standards.

i personally it's just a combination of both, but teens play a bigger role in what companies advertise.

i agree with this person's caption...

"ugh this would look so good on you"

"ok u DEFS need this in ur life" "DON'T REGRET IT" "GEDDIT SIS" "you're totally worth this" "SPEND MORE SAVE MORE"

those are just a few of hundreds of email subject titles i see from forever 21, a popular clothing company for teens and young adults. i literally tried unsubscribing from their mailing list multiple times and it doesn't work...its a trap. i have noticed that stores have been "trying to save the environment" lately so to save paper, they've been asking for customers' emails to "email the receipt". yeah hollister emailed me my receipt from a year ago and those emails never stopped. emailing is one of the new and upcoming most annoying advertising technique. not only does it flood my inbox, it also distracts me from what i was actually trying to do.

forever 21 is treating me as if i am their friend to convince me to open their emails to see what would look good on me or what i DEFS need in my life or what something i don't want to regret. they want their customers to think "oh, forever 21 is my friend. i can trust them, they know what i like". most importantly, it attracts my attention. i never really payed attention to their emails but "ugh this would look so good on you" really caught my eye because it was a straight up compliment that was sent to their whole email list, implying that their clothing would look good on anyone.

urban outfitters is another company that sends their emails to me, but they never catch my attention because they all are "FLASH SALE" "HURRY: 30% off..." "LAST CHANCE: 20% off..". my brain has practically traded itself to ignore and scroll thru those emails because i know there's no hurry, it's not my last chance, and that urban outfitters has a flash sale almost every week. this use of time pressure technique has gotten old as people have started to notice that sales come and go. i think the next email technique would be sweet talking the consumer.

i'm just tryna be different

in the frontline episode "merchants of cool", the idea of what teenagers think is cool is brought up. they mention how teenagers think something is cool until it becomes mainstream, which have become more true this past year. i agree that the reason why teen consumption is crucial to america's economy is because of our exposure to entertainment and media. we see how her teenagers look and their lifestyle and often consciously and unconsciously aspire to be like them. then we go for materialistic, superficial items to become them. of course, this attracts the attention of companies, who then produce things to please us. i never really realized the power of our preferences and trends. 

for the past few years, the way to go was being basic: victoria's secret pink clothing, starbucks, messy buns, uggs all day everyday baby. this was what was popular for awhile and started to die down last year. now what is cool is being different and quirky. 2000's style is back... wearing neon colors, strips of rainbow hair, short sleeves over long sleeves, butterfly clips, cheetah print, etc. it went from fitting in to making sure to stand out from the crowd. 

companies definitely do a good job following these trends...fast too. the second a trend starts urban outfitters and forever 21 are the first to hop on the train to make their own version to sell. it clearly works for teens who want to follow the sudden 2000's trend but for the people who started to wear 2000's clothing doesn't want it to become mainstream, so they stop and move on to something else. and then eventually 2000's style would become outta trend and another trend would come in. this is a constant cycle companies are following. 

the thing i find the most interesting about this social phenomenon is how much people are willing to pay for "trendy" things. and much companies charge. i remember wearing barrettes, butterfly clips, and scrunchies when i was in elementary school.  i would get packs of these sparkly accessories from the dollar store. now urban outfitters is charging $12 for a 5 pack of scrunchies or $8 for 6 barrettes. are you buying the brand or buying the product? it's just very odd to see things from your childhood that your parents forced you to wear being overpriced at "trendy" "contemporary" stores.

2015-2017                                                            2019 (or 2000's)

 

reading is fun!

i really wished i read more. i used to read a lot in elementary school. the number of books you can read were the instagram likes of my childhood. my friends and i would bring 5 books to school at a time to show off. now looking back on it, we were kinda crazy for books. one of my friends, dylan, would max out the number of books you can borrow at one time: 30.

what happened to the reading craze?

while i was cleaning my room, i found all my schoolwork from elementary school and i threw away pretty much everything except one thing. in 5th grade, we had to log in our reading and had a monthly goal of 400 pages and i read 2099... that's a lot. this reading log required me to log in the date, the title of the book, the author, and number of pages read. in this month of november 2013, i read a total of 13 books. t h i r t e e n?? last year, my new year's resolution was to read 10 books outside of school and i read 7... reading 13 books in 23 days is insane. according to the log, for the most part, i would read a book a day (some took 2 days). now, i complain about reading 20 pages a night, which makes me kinda sad to think about. if 10 year old me can read 202 pages in one day, 15 year old me should be able to read one 20 page chapter. to be fair, i was reading geronimo stilton (aka a lot of pictures).

although i stopped reading for pleasure regularly, i still read (sometimes). and like my little self, i still like reading books in one sitting. if it's a book i'm interesting in, i will not put it down until i'm down reading it. i think that's how my procrastination sprouted...by reading instead of anything else. last year on multiple occasions, i would read a 200 or 300 page book on a school night. how you ask? well i didn't finish ANY of my homework, walked around the house reading it, ate dinner with it, sat in my bath towel reading it, and went to sleep at 1 in the morning... so yeah that's how.

two weeks ago was spring break, and my family and i went to texas. right before we left for the airport, i looked at my bookshelf and picked a book a friend recommended to me and shoved it in my backpack. in my head i was like "yeah i am not going to read this bc i always bring books on vacation and never read em". then i head to the airport and surprise, i started reading it and liking it. i was about halfway this 300 page book after my 2 hour flight to los angeles. now on my 4 hour flight to houston, i finished it and it was just so good, i started reading it again. and for the first 5 days of the trip, i read this book six times. yeah, i really liked it. i also made my parents drive me to different book stores to check if the sequel was there and no hope. then i finally made the desperate decision to buy the e book on my dad's iPad. the last two days of the trip, i read the sequel three times. now that i'm writing this, i sound a little crazy. but seriously if you like dystopian novels, read stung by bethany wiggins.

fun fact: i got glasses in third grade because i was reading in the dark when i was supposed to be asleep. now my vision is getting worse because i am on my phone in the dark when i am supposed to be asleep. just imagine how much smarter i would be if i read instead of going on my phone.


 some of my elementary school faves 

tarte, plz pay for my vacation

in the recent years, i have noticed that companies has taken sponsorship to a whole new level of smart, especially makeup companies. instead of paying beauty "gurus"/"vloggers" thousands of dollars to talk about how fabulous their new lipstick line is, why not just send them free lipsticks for them to open in front of their hundreds of thousands of viewers? makeup companies send out pr (public relations) packages to basically promote their products to youtubers' viewers, which i find really smart because 1) it's not direct in the way they just sit and talk about how amazing the product is for five minutes and 2) people LOVE other people unboxing mail packages. companies have been stepping up their pr game to the point where all the makeup is packaged in an over the top, bright pink, blue, and purple, box shaped into a pineapple and when you open it, confetti and money rains from it. ok, not really, but that's seriously what it feels like when i'm watching these videos. everything is just so aesthetically pleasing to look at. i don't even wear makeup but i want to buy their product? i mean that's good advertising.

what's even better than receiving free makeup is getting a free vacation to a tropical island. a makeup brand i never heard of is spending bank to bring groups of 50 youtubers on luxurious vacations and has made their way to one of the top makeup brands from doing this. #trippinwithtarte has become so relevant in the beauty side of youtube. basically tarte would pay for everyone's vacation (everything included (yes even the private jets with #trippinwithtarte painted on the side and embroidered on neck pillows). once they reached bora bora, youtubers would film their whole experience showing off all the free makeup and custom accessories laying on the beds of their 5 star, over the water cabana hotel rooms.

makeup companies like tarte has come up a brilliant way to advertise their brand that actually works for their focus group: young people who watch beauty videos on youtube. it is crazy how creative companies get to make their product popular. now, i kinda wish i was a beauty vlogger, then maybe i can ride a private jet to the maldives for free.

girls vs boys *toy ad edition*

lately, i have been watching a lot of nickelodeon, a channel i never really watched when i was younger. but i did watch the kids' channel qubo. i noticed how the ads for kid audiences seem to have very similar templates and style of execution. when it comes to toys, most toys seem to be similar to the ones 7 years ago. same barbies, nerf guns, play doh, really wack electronic skateboards/ripsticks. i am also still surprised about how genders play a role in toy ads. i don't think there should be gender specified toys and i thought that idea would have died down as the years went by. but commercials for "boy toys" are still aggressive and fast paced with this male narrator (whose voice hasn't changed in the past decade) yelling. meanwhile, commercials for "girl toys" are still very pink and are usually girls singing in the background while teen girls dressed to look younger are playing with the toys.

this is an ad i've seen so much recently, and it is for "shopkins lil secret lockets". it is obvious that it is geared towards young girls because of the girls singing in the background, girls playing with the toys, and the excessive amount of the color pink. i think the producers used the need for affiliation. there were multiple lines implying that if you buy this, you're buying a new friend: a doll you can take around in a locket. "a symbol of friendship you can wear too" and "inside each locket, a teeny best friend" tells the audience that you should this toy to get new friend, which who doesn't want? i think this commercial also uses avante garde. they use words like "new" and "explore" and "so many to collect" to encourage kids to buy this because it's different and hasn't been done before. the name "lil secret" also implies that only kids with this toy would understand that the locket necklace is actually a "tiny world inside". i think these advertising tactics are obviously working because of its long-lasting success throughout the years with similar templates for similar toys.

this ad is called "nerf fest is here!" and is obviously an ad for the popular "boy toy" nerf guns. this is the same exact narrator for almost every aggressive "boy toy" commercial who is yelling the script really fast. here is the need to agress. all the different names of the guns or "blasters" are just over the top to make it sound dangerous like "twinshock", "deadbolt", "raptorstrike" and "motofury". i honestly don't know what any of that means but it just sounds like they put together two aggressive sounding words to make a name. and with each gun, they show teen guys knocking down things like walls and metal along with killing cartoon zombies. i did not expect this but this ad used the magic ingredient tactic when describing one gun's "innovative switchfire technology". they make it sound really cool but really it's just a knob where you can adjust your "firing mode". the ad's choice of sound affects is also the cherry on top. they have very intense rock instrumental with a lot of bass along with pounding and thud sound effects when adding the title of each gun. along with the shopkins ad, their strategies are clearly working to convince their audiences to buy their product. even though they used the same tactics 10 years ago, i guess they're just that effective.

vsco vomit

disclaimer: i'm not trying to make fun of the people of vsco. this is my opinion on the app and its users. let me know if i said anything offensive.

vsco: the "photo editing" app... yeah right. this app has been blowing up since late 2018 and has turn into a social media platform dominated by teenage girls. vsco is advertised as a photo editing app for "creators", which what i was using it for until i realized a lot of girls on instagram putting their vsco handle into their bios. then i found about a whole different world of media. here on vsco, everyone seems to be super happy and quirky and relatable.

i'm not saying having a positive mindset is bad, but "vsco girls" take it to another level. i always see things like "happiest girls are the prettiest" "no bad days" and "espresso makes me less depresso". as someone who has struggled with mild depressive episodes, it does not feel good when people associate beauty with emotions. also, really? no bad days? and i know for a fact coffee does not reduce depression. i know these type of phrases aren't meant to harm others, but i think they are a bit insensitive and unrealistic.

vsco couples are a whole other realm of vsco. my friend veronica and i have noticed the extreme cheesiness of these posts, and we personally find a lot of it stupid. so we made a pinterest board called vsco vom with all these posts. we find them amusing because of how unrealistic everything is.  couple posts often come in the form of snapchat text bars and text messages exchanged. now that i think about it, ALL vsco couple posts are in those two forms. also, a lot of them can't tell the difference between your and you're and that drives me insane. here are some of my favorite "um..." posts:

• "not even God can handle me" with a girl wearing sunglasses, a pink hoodie, and her juul in her mouth 
• "boys who say your name before talking to you is the BEST feeling ever" 
• "when i say ur cute ur supposed to say it back. Not just 'thanks'"
• "did you know a crush only lasts 4 months so if u like someone longer than that ur in love..."
• "she doesn't even notice but i stare at her so much"
• "your the second best girl ever...i love my momma" it's you're not your :/
• this one is a text conversation."im about to cry in mcdonalds" "b*tch embrace it. mcbreakdown" 
• "why flex ur AirPods when u can flex ur beautiful girlfriend" 

i can't really explain why this is so cringeworthy for me. i think it's because everything sounds so forced and fake to idolize a relationship or a "teenager" lifestyle. 

if you're reading this, please tell me ur opinion on vsco, i would appreciate other viewpoints of it :)

big words don't make you sound smart??? *intense*

to be honest, i think i lost a couple of brain cells reading george orwell's article politics and the enlightenment language... but i think i got an idea of what his message was. i agree with his idea that modern writing includes a lot of unnecessary metaphors, big words, and long sentences, but i probably agree to this because i am a writer who lacks fancy vocabulary and things of that sort. you can probably tell, but i'm way more comfortable with casual writing rather than "formal" writing. up until this year, i always thought that more words (and fancier ones too) are better. i always thought that longer sentences were better. this school year was the year teachers started telling us to stop "trying to sound smart" by creating long sentences and using big words, and that kinda blew my mind.

i also agree with orwell's idea that writers lose their thought when they try to use certain phraseology. i always struggle with turning my ideas into words, especially with my limited vocabulary. so the questions that orwell says to use for every sentence is helpful, "what am i trying to say? what words will express it? what image or idiom will make it clearer? is this image fresh enough to have an effect?".

in conclusion, i agree with george because he says bigger vocabulary doesn't make writing better.

ads be like...

i agree with the pbs documentary persuaders idea that we are always surrounded by ads and there's really no avoiding them. i like the analogy made in the documentary saying that ads are pesticides and consumers (us) are roaches, and we have become immune to many pesticides, leading to companies to come up with new "pesticides" or strategies.

as an avid viewer of shark tank, i feel like i already had a bit of knowledge on the idea of having a focus group for a company. this correlates to the idea of satisfying consumers. of course a perfume company would want to put their ads in beauty magazines and not sports illustrated. this seems like one of the most obvious ways to attract profit. we cannot please everyone but we definitely can please a certain group of people. 

one idea that persuaders included that i never really thought about was the idea of fantasy, lifestyle, and identity. it made me realize how many commercials i see is trying to sell a certain lifestyle rather than the product. iv'e been seeing a lot of coke ads that are just these quick random shots of people running marathons, hanging out with friends,  jumping into pools, and of course the bubbly brown soda with really upbeat trap music. and i am just like what just happened? ads like these are promoting a lifestyle that apparently comes with the product they're selling, which obviously isn't true. like am i really going to play tennis like serena williams because i have the same nikes as her? i wish lol. we now know that companies are using psychology to kinda manipulate consumers into correlating their product with a certain lifestyle or identity... but are we really thinking about psychology when we are watching tv? probably not, so i would say these companies' advertising strategies are working. 

this taco bell commercial is interesting bc it shows a guy in formal wear holding taco bell and walks straight into a pool that is actually filled with bubbles of hot sauce while people are eating at a dining table full of more taco bell. oh and the vibe-y music.

"no you're not in some alternate chalupa-verse. you're experiencing the $5 chalupas craving box..." 

same story, different words

 CNN's "She dedicated herself to covering Northern Ireland. Murdered investigative journalist 'tirelessly pursued the truth'" and Fox's "Northern Irish police arrest 2 over killing of journalist" both report the story of the murder of journalist Lyra McKee. Although both sources are supposedly telling the same story, CNN and Fox took rather different approaches on the story. CNN spent most of the article discussing McKee's successful journalism career. Towards the end is really when they started talking about her death. Overall, this article seemed like a tribute and biography for Lyra McKee rather than a reporting of what happened. Meanwhile, Fox focused on the actual story: her murder. It is almost obvious what is being told by reading the two titles. CNN used words like "dedicated" and "pursued the truth" to describe the victim. In fact, only one word out of the 14 word title indicates the main idea of the story: "Murdered". Fox does the opposite and focused on crime, using only one word to describe McKee: "journalist". CNN's focus is the victim while Fox's focus is the criminals. Here are the first sentences of each article: "Lyra McKee, the young investigative journalist shot dead during violence in Northern Ireland on Thursday, had been widely viewed as a rising star within the industry (CNN) and "Police in Northern Ireland on Saturday arrested two teenagers in connection with the fatal shooting of a journalist during rioting in the city of Londonderry" (Fox). In CNN's article, McKee is the subject and is given a positive description. The sentence structure is like McKee's success while sprinkling in her murder. Fox, like I said earlier, focused on the actual crime details. The subject of their first sentence are the police who arrested the teenagers, not the victim. Once again they refer to McKee not by her name but "journalist". Overall, it seems that CNN took a tribute approach while Fox took a crime report approach. 

CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/19/uk/lyra-mckee-northern-ireland-gbr-intl/index.html

Fox:  https://www.foxnews.com/world/northern-irish-police-arrest-2-over-killing-of-journalist

different perspectives

my relationship with media

   as someone who was born a 4 years before the first iPhone release, i think it's safe to say i am kind of in the middle when it comes to my use of media.  i'm pretty sure spent my whole infant hood screen-free. this may sound obvious, but i was babysitting a family friend's 2 year old and all he was saying was "iPhone". the media i got as a kid was mostly vhs tapes of barney and illegally burned cd's of strawberry shortcake and max and ruby. but more importantly, i read a lot (go me). i got my first personal device when i was like in late elementary school (maybe 5th grade...i'm not sure). it was a kindle but i didn't use it for reading... my parents just didn't want to spend hundreds on an iPad. this is when i discovered youtube, but all i remember watching were toy unboxings haha. after a few years of having a kindle and soon to be elementary school graduate, in comes my first phone, the pastel yellow iPhone 5c with my gray and turquoise case. before my phone, i emailed. now looking back, emailing is so much better when it comes to not getting distracted. but texting is easier to reach someone faster.

   it's crazy to think that i only had had a phone for 3 years and how fast i have grown to be dependent on it. i spent 12 out of 15 years without a phone and now i can't even leave my room without it? now that's kinda sad. the invention of the smartphone has changed practically every aspect of my life. i remember being in elementary school waking up and getting the newspaper and flipping to the weather section to decide what i'll wear. now, while i'm still in bed, grab my phone (less then an arm's reach away), and click the weather app to check. also, who needs a camera anymore when you can just use ur iPhone x portrait mode double lens camera? nowadays, it almost seems like our smartphones are literally taking over everything we do.

   the internet and social media... i have a love/hate relationship with them. the internet has made it easier for people to be more educated because its diversity in information. with the internet comes social media platforms, the ones i use include pinterest, instagram, youtube, and snapchat. pinterest was the first social media platform i got, and is still is my favorite for one reason: the lack of societal pressure and competition. instagram, on the other hand, is arguably THE MOST TOXIC PLATFORM out there (if you don't agree, please share why). it's so demanding and the conscious or subconscious follower/like count competition is dangerous. i feel like after getting instagram and snapchat is when i felt most self-conscious about myself. especially with the snapchat filters that slimmed your face, cleared your acne, made your eyes big and blue, and added lush eyelashes.

   overall, i think media has gotten so competitive, there's no avoiding negativity at this point, but it is still very important to use media to be aware of current events and learn from other peoples' stories/experiences.

expectation vs reality