Is negative PR positive? Or more importantly, is it illegal to sell your own placenta?

.

Whichever career a celebrity is striving for, PR plays a vital role in achieving the aforementioned status. As is likely to continue, there has been an upsurge of controversial female characters within the media. The emphasis here being on the term ‘character’ because that’s exactly what they are – constructed personas.

In 2006 a woman by the name of Katie Hopkins made it to our screens and, whether we appreciated it or not, infiltrated our living rooms as part of a programme titled The Apprentice. She caused a lot of issues within the show as she happily made many offensive and derogatory comments to fellow contestants about themselves as well as the general public. Despite this she reached the penultimate episode where she promptly withdrew herself from the competition for childcare reasons. It was a peculiar occurrence and many speculations about her decision was made around this time. While all this negative press caused her to lose her job (that let her take unpaid leave to join the programme) and reportedly affected her family, she began to capitalise on her dislike by selling her story to a major newspaper as well as magazine company. From here her, for want of a better word, fame took off.

No doubt she caused controversy in 2007’s I’m a Celebrity… Get me Out of Here but 2013 showed her really pulling out all the stops, beginning with her more well-known discussion that took place on her ITV’s This Morning appearance. To surmise this and the subsequent year of her career she made: class-ism remarks (in regards to children’s names), criticism of obesity, ‘badly-timed’ (arguably intentional) tweets about Glasgow, commenting on trade union leader Bob Crow shortly after his death and describing Palestinians (after two Israelis were killed) as “filthy rodents”. That is just a few of the many controversies Hopkins caused, a list that is unfortunately not exhaustive.

Now, like the majority of people hearing these things being said, most would think her comments 100% genuine and that she is a terrible human being. However, possibly as controversial as her comments – some don’t think this at all. Broadcaster Terry Christian who, opposing Hopkins on Channel 5’s The Big Benefits Row: Live (February 2014), accused her of only expressing her controversial opinions in order to make money from all the media attention. She is now starring in her full controversial glory in Big Brother 2015.

Katie Hopkins and what she says is like watching EastEnders – the nasty characters always make for better viewing. Her simulacra has been carefully and meticulously constructed to a point where the majority of the public believe her to be genuine. Similarly and more recently is ‘Britain’s most hated woman’ (and subsequent model), Josie Cunningham. In 2013 she spoke to The Sun newspaper boasting that back in 2009 she acquired breast augmentation surgery on the NHS.

What is amazing is how overt she is about the game she is playing yet is still capitalising and making substantial profit from her controversy – quoted in an interview saying ‘I won’t be hated for free – I’m not naive’ (BBC Newsbeat). January 2015 has seen a documentary debuted about her that has created even more backlash for her within the media – particularly on social media. ‘Her agent, Rob Cooper, claims they usually charge “no less than a four figure sum” for access to her because they have a lot of overheads – including security’ (BBC Newsbeat). Taking into account the amount of interviews she’s sold inclusive of a documentary, Cunningham must be worth a lot more than she was before informing the nation of her NHS implants. Clearly this was a brilliant PR move as it is still very much paying off. She could even join Hopkin’s and follow in her footsteps (in more ways than one) as there are rumours of Cunningham going into the Big Brother house. She has of course since caused more backlash by announcing she would have had an abortion if it allowed her in the Truman Show-esque house.

Within this documentary, her PR agent Cooper made it overtly clear they were making PR decisions to intentionally cause offensive. He and Cunningham were devious in their Tweets including one about selling her placenta after birth – they even deliberately planted a grammatical error so more people would respond with even more reason to insult. Of course all marketing of a celebrity is premediated, but this seems even more calculated than usual. But who’s to say it is? What is to say that making a living by playing the media at its own game is immoral? Living in a media landscape where many advertisements legally have to remind us it is in fact an advertisement (typically with the use of questionably miniscule asterisks), maybe we are so beyond overt falsification that new techniques has led it to become covert.

It all also begs the question of equality, as no male celebrity has received this level of ‘witch-hunt where we all get together and burn’ him. ‘It’s what we have been doing in civilisation since we have had’ ‘this cultural figure of the hated woman’ (The Telegraph) and with how influential media is, it is stunting any kind of progression on gender equality. Remember the ‘Burn Book’ in the chick flick Mean Girls? Think of that but on a broader scale – the similarities are all there.

Bibliography

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/30928875

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/josie-the-most-hated-woman-in-britain

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11366024/Josie-Cunningham-and-Katie-Hopkins-hatred-is-bad-for-you.-Stop-it.html

Essay extract – ‘choose a current controversy and analyse how it is informed and determined by power, spectacle and memory within contemporary mediated culture’

.

This is an extract from a third year essay I have recently written. It is made up of different parts from a 3,500 essay so if it doesn’t flow there is a reason!

 

The 20th November 2012 brought an opportunity for a heavily sought-after change in the Church of England. What surely could’ve helped bring the Church and Christianity into the 21st century has been discarded, as a lack of votes from within the House of Laity prevented the sanction of women in the Church being given the prospect of becoming Bishops. The General Synod’s denial of ordination saw a disturbance within the Christian community, some glad of the outcome but also with even some Bishops disagreeing with the decision. This led to some more critical views on the extent of social order and the discourses that are thrust upon us by these institutions of power. Speculation whether religion is (as many followers believe) to be a spiritual creation or if it is in fact a mythologised human conceptualisation used to dominate and thereafter control the masses, is it here being used as yet another way of enforcing patriarchy in our society?

A lot of Christians are born into their religion and as Foucault would argue the ones in control of our early stages of life have a substantial and influential amount of power. A Channel 4 documentary titled The Virgin Daughters aired in 2008, it observed and gave the audience insight into the Purity Movement spread all over the United States specifically in Colorado Springs (this movement is known of in the UK but clearly to lesser extent, otherwise it is just less reported). On watching this programming it appeared to be almost cult-like, and it was very much children being brought up to believe what the parents believe; arguably this could be said the same for atheist children with atheist parents. Durkheim, Weber and Marx all believed religion to be an illusion, ‘the idea that religion presents a fundamental truth of existence seemed rather improbable’ (Cliffnotes, Unknown). The whole concept of the Purity Balls they hold is for daughters to pledge celibacy until the appropriate age is reached and their patriarchal fathers can choose a husband for them. However it doesn’t seem like just celibacy, it seems like they are joining almost cult-like behaviour – such as some would see in a lot of religious discourses. ‘Psychologists who study cult behaviour say there are specific persuasion methods and group dynamics that can lead people to extreme behaviour they might not agree to in a different environment’ (Sedivy and Carlson, 2011, Page: 11). In more extreme cases such as Louis Theroux’s documentary on The Most Hated Family In America, they generally only interact and live near members of the same Church and community who harbour the same beliefs – therefore their children don’t’ meet anyone with contrasting views until a lot later on in their life. By this point ‘total immersion’ (Sedivy and Carlson, 2011, Page: 11). in this environment has taken place and a consequent effect of this is shown when some of the Purity daughters were asked direct questions they couldn’t necessarily justify their answers given – ‘many cult members are usually blind as to why they’re making the choices they are’ (Sedivy and Carlson, 2011, Page: 11). In Blumer’s theory on contagion he breaks crowd behaviour into five stages; a lack of consensus, breakdown of social norms, ‘milling’ and a release of ‘collective excitement’ that all lead to the final stage of contagion with the thereafter final collective act. This in addition to Le Bon and Park’s previous theories on contagion attempt to comprehend the process that alter habitual consciousness as well as emotions, this can also be applied to the cult-like effect of religion.

Even though Durkheim explained his Fundamentalist theory based on small societies only, his argument over religion never just concerning belief seems to be logically valid. He believed in order to maintain, develop and strengthen the sense of group unity within a religious community; rituals and ceremonies must take place. Affirming common values and beliefs in Church on a regular basis is one way to truss members together, or there are the sacred rituals and rites that take place such as prayers in times of crisis, births, marriages and Christmas. These latter rituals (often seen as ceremonies) are so embedded into our memory that they are not necessarily seen as religious anymore; these governed activities are historical lineage of prescribed social practices within the institution of religion. As Bourdieu coined, this is an example of ‘body hexis’ where internalised and unconscious social rules have become apparent – like the expectations in life of getting married. The social memory society have of these ceremonies brought about an inertia in social structures so while preserving the past they prevent the construction from changing – reaffirming the power of religion as an institution. These traditions have stemmed long ago from Roman Catholicism prior to the 16th century Reformation that saw Henry VIII come to power with the breaking away from Rome and the consequent introduction of the Church of England. This in itself is known partly due to social memory as no doubt we can all recall the history lessons we so greatly enjoyed in school about it. After all as history is a reconstruction where the truth can never be achieved, should these traditions such as women being subordinate to men in the Church still exist?

Whether acknowledged or not we have and continue to live in a patriarchal society, with femininity being termed a patriarchal construction in itself by many. Jacqueline Rose thought this to be used to disable women to secure male power, labelling the female practice of femininity as an ‘injury’ (Rose, 2005, Page: 91). Such in the case of the Church, the power of patriarchy is prominent where the male viewpoint is implicitly privileged and understood as universal and as part of society’s collective memory. However counter-discursive feminist viewpoints such as Camille Paglia’s exist, believing ‘when it defined man as the enemy, feminism is alienating women from their own bodies’ (Paglia, 2005, Page 111). This could be true to the point where women will forever be subsidiary to men but despite this as a gender women have come a long way. With hegemonic gender roles so rooted in our social memory, it is embedded in the historical lineage of our social practices, which continue to aid the reproduction of this existing patriarchal structure we live in. This collective memory creates a nexus between the past and present, but Halbwachs identified Bergson’s two forms of memory in his book, one of which ‘involves a certain disinterest in the present’ (Halbwachs and Coser, 1992, Page: 47). This can be illustrated by the Church of England institution as collective memory has been created and now functions as truths that the religion is based on in the present.

Marx (alongside reading Feuerbach’s The Essence of Christianity, 1841) believed religion to be conceptualised because people didn’t have an understanding of society as well as them needing consolidation that there is in fact life after death. This gave people a sense of alleviated escapism and taught them that as long as they accept their own life no matter how bad, the rewards and happiness would be postponed to their afterlife – he described this thought process as the ‘opium of the people’ (Marx, K, 1970, Page: 131). As a result of instilling this toleration to oppression, people’s attention was alienated by being deterred away from the negatives of everyday life like the disparities concerned with power and wealth – such as women not being sanctioned as Priests (before 1992) or Bishops. This ability to maintain social order by domination is known and identified in the Conflict Theory derived from Marx as well as being referenced in Le Bon’s theory on mobs. Similarly it compares to Ancient Rome whereby the empire subsidised food prices and generated lavish entertainment in order to distract ‘the mob’ from the increasing power and dominance the empire were acquiring. Another way of upholding the power of religion is by the method of catharsis termed as such due to Aristotle’s poetics, Freud and Breuer used catharsis when analysing and imparting psychotherapy to their patients. In the theme of religion, it refers to symbolic cleansing rituals such as baptism as well as accepting repentance for sin and guilt by confiding in a Priest – implying religion is a source of therapy and a necessity for a person’s stability and purity.

The denial of this proposed change was ‘a social relation among people’ (Debord, 1984, Page: 7) and therefore a spectacle. By observing any news stories consumers have their own preconception of the topic, as well as the mediated version they are being shown, to gauge their own opinions. It gives the illusion of participation and engages with our emotions. While being involved in religion isn’t just an act of observation, there are definitely aspects to it that agree with the theory of spectacle. Religion is so overpowering people merge their identity and lose themselves, arguably making them passive. Such like a brand by incorporating many mnemonics such as the image of Jesus on the cross and the customary sacramental offer of the wine chalice and bread during communion, the spectacle is embedded in the people’s memories even more so with these symbols. Spectacle is also said to engage emotions and override the mind, which Foucault would argue is very much applicable to Religion. The powerful hierarchy of the Church control the disempowered community, or as Le Bon would term ‘the mob’.

The spectacle of women not being able to be ordained as Bishops is a decision made by the powerful for the consumption of the disempowered – it gives the Church of England even more control over their community and the gender roles within the social structure. Despite disagreements with this decision that some female priests had, they are still continuing to be part of the Church. This is therefore proving that religion is a form of what Barthes (and later Bourdieu explored) termed mythologising as it can continuously be used to make us believe the institution is special and exclusive. By being mythologised, the hegemonic beliefs expounded by the media become ‘naturalised’ and as Marx identified, they become part of our false consciousness.

Marx famously said religion to be ‘the opium of the people’ and ‘the abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness’ (Marx, K, 1970, Page: 131). Within his Critical theory he elaborates how religion was created to distract the lower classes from their suffering; it was used as a mechanism by the powerful to control them and reduce the possibility of a revolt towards the dominating higher classes. True happiness was never to happen due to economic realities so this is why the afterlife concept was conceived – it was a tool that provided solace and a sense of relief, just as many drugs (like opium) do for people in distress. The sheer fact we need religion as a form of escapism to deal with everyday life is an expression of more underlying and fundamental oppressed unhappiness. In this sense women within the Church may have these oppressed feelings, but know not to question what they are told as they believe it will be restored to them in their next life. This acts only as a distraction from the distress, so as the opium wears off and fails to help the abusers, will this realisation occur in the same way for the religion we seem to have now made occult in society?

 Bibliography

Cliff Notes. (N/A). Sociological Theories of Religion. Available: http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/topicArticleId-26957,articleId-26931.html. Last accessed 1st Dec 2012.

Debord, G (1984). Society of the Spectacle. United States of America: Black & Red.

Halbwachs, M., and Coser, L (1992). On Collective Memory. United States of America: The University of Chicago Press.

Marx, K (1970). Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Paglia, C (1994). Vamps and Tramps. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.

Rose, J (2005). Sexuality in the Field of Vision. London and New York: Verso Books.

Sedivy, J., and Carlson, G. (2011). Sold On Language. N/A: Wiley; 1 edition.

Reflective coursework – audio analysis

.

I tried to embed this but somehow failed, so here is a direct link:

http://soundcloud.com/jocelynroseharris/201mc-reflective-coursework

Reflective coursework – daily diary

.

So due to the numerous issues I faced actually acquiring the professional experience, I have only had a week of work. I contemplated applying for an extension, however I have definitely felt that even in the space of five days I had learnt a considerable amount and have more than enough to report. The following is an accumulation of the blog posts I intended to transcribe daily, however I found myself waking up at five in the morning and not getting home until eight in the evening – so had I tried my literature credibility would’ve probably suffered due to depletion. Anyway such irrelevance aside, please enjoy my daily summations – an audio reflective analysis of my experience as a whole will follow.

Day One

So as my previous blog entry states, my job was that of an Independent Sales Advisor. Essentially I would be taking part in the increasing sector of direct sales, interacting face-to-face with customers within event marketing for different clients (in this case the British Red Cross). As I sat in reception, I was handed an information sheet about the formerly named charity to read through. Following this, I was encouraged and eased into what they call an Opportunity Meeting. I was introduced to their Business Development Programme (including their ‘Mountain Climber’ training), which went through the stages of promotion and elaborated just how fast-moving this industry can be for the right people – with some progressing to managerial status within a matter of months. We went through the cash flow quadrant model in relation to the jobs the business has to offer as well as in regards to the economy. We were given a brief talk on sales followed by more information on Care2Give including their targets and expectations of us as a company. As I hoped, we then went through and conversed about sales techniques – however with this I feel there is a limit to how much I can disclose due to signing and therefore agreeing not to give ‘trade secrets’ out.

As I’m sure many businesses do, Marketing Endeavours believe very much in OTJ (on-the-job training). So after being in the office for only a couple of hours, I found myself travelling to one of the events set up in a shopping centre located in Canley with one other colleague. Obviously with a job of this nature, pay is performance-related as they work on commission. Now as with everything, there are advantages and disadvantages – but as everyone has to pay for their own travel, making the sales is critical. I put this to the back of my mind in order to at least lessen the pressure I felt I was putting on myself. Our event was that of a stand and two banners, small and compact as it is transportable. We got to the shopping centre at roughly 10:30am, and for most of the day my challenge was even just approaching people – I found it really difficult. I unsurprisingly made no sales whereas my colleague made a handful of successful applications. On the way home they encourage newer employees to perform a ‘breakdown’ of the day as shown below. This is definitely beneficial and my manager went through it with me when I got back to the office, which was a positive end to my first day.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Day Two

The morning meeting put emphasis on expectations and the three key elements that if not enveloped failure is anticipated; high work ethic, student mentality and a positive attitude. We went through more techniques as well as thoroughly explaining to Law of Averages in regards to the gauge sheets we have to fill out throughout the day (recording how many people we stop and present to etc.). Today I travelled to Dudley to an event we had set up in a branch of WH Smiths. I soon realised the significant difference in the clientele leaving a shop as oppose to in a shopping centre when they’re ‘shopping’ – less people are inclined to stop. I feel this may have affected my mentality and therefore my attitude; making it likely to reduce my chance of sales. This was my breakdown:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Day Three

A lot of motivational talk is given in our morning meetings in order to get everyone empowered and positive for the day ahead. We were told about Hector Montalvo giving a speech at one of our collective and annual meetings in London, as well as quotes from numerous other iconic employees within the industry. Following this, each week the managers from different branches have a conference call that employees sit in on and listen to for progress information and tips etc. – the main emphasis being that ‘it is a conversation, NOT a pitch’. Today also saw the introduction of a new client – The Woodland Trust. This was to be the client of the ‘road trip’ to Wales commencing the week of the 7^th – where employees are able to meeting others in the field as well as experience a different location and different consumer base. We had a representative from the aforementioned charity come in and give a presentation which I found very insightful and as everyone was learning it for the first time it put me on the same level. The main fact I learnt was that only 12% of the UK is wooded compared to an average of 44% in other parts of Europe – I was astonished, I would never have expected it to be that low. Unfortunately I learnt all of this in vain as having this deadline to keep to and having to pay for travel and accommodation compelled me to decline – due to a lack of time and a lack of funds. However, we went on to do some fundraising induction training referring to Care2Give, including attrition rate and quality capturing. Following this, I had my second day marketing in WH Smiths in Dudley. It went better than the day before but I still felt like I wasn’t getting any better at what I was doing. My breakdown is below, after which me and my colleague discussed the Impulse Curve in a lot more detail to help me understand the selling process more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Day Four

Thursday morning’s meeting seemed even more important than any before as the manager held the first part. He went through the five steps to a conversation that we should be following, as well as supporting it with the acronym AIDA (Attention, Interest, Decision and Action). As stated before, these could be termed ‘trade secrets’ so I am not going into too much detail. From this, we listened and discussed the structure of talking in relation to the Impulse Curve which I found extremely interesting. Another managerial employee spoke to us about the three R’s (Read, Relate and Relax) while someone else explained how important it is to believe in the charity, in the system (LOA) and in yourself. I went out more positive than the previous days, travelling to a shopping centre in Smethwick. This definitely had more scope and I had heard of my colleague’s success the previous day with gaining six applications in one day! Apparently it isn’t as amazing to them, but I was certainly impressed.  My breakdown is as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Day Five

The first meeting was taken by the manager, explaining how we are not sales people we are consultants and using quotes made famous by Brian Tracey. We went through elements such as preparation, networking, accountability, AIDA, relationship and credibility. We briefly covered a bit more information on the British Red Cross and what they are currently helping with in order to make it more relevant (such as the typhoon in the Philippines). After my day out of the office back in Canley, I had a meeting with my manager and my colleague who had helped me for most of my days there about my progress. I will elaborate about this in my reflection; see below the breakdown of my final day.

Reflective coursework – interview process

.

Nervously awaiting my interview with Marketing Endeavours, I tried desperately to remember all the research I had done on the company the night before and the ‘buzz words’ I had decided on to memorise. As I have found with most first interviews, they don’t seem to last that long – no more than forty minutes. I was asked many questions, including the one I STILL (and will probably always) fail to understand “do you have any work experience?”. Of course not! Why else am I here? This aside, the interviewer didn’t seem as bothered that I didn’t have any unlike most of the others I have conversed with. A lot of what he was discussing and asking was referring to customer service, so my experience working part-time for a supermarket finally came in useful.

Either way, it must’ve have gone well enough as they invited me (as well as a few others from the 40+ that applied) back for a second interview the following day. This involved a group interview with two other candidates as well as elaborating on the job specifications and expectations. The job is that of an Independent Sales Advisor, where a company (in this case British Red Cross) enlist Charity fundraisers Care2Give who then employ Marketing Endeavours to use their direct sales marketing approach to gain them customers (as charities call ‘donors’). We went through key reasons of why the use of direct sales as oppose to indirect sales are on the increase, the main being that it’s a measurable method. As well as this we went through the British Red Cross (what they do) the law of averages, job development and how we would be capable of moving up in the company at a relative pace. My job would be to help host event marketing by setting up official stands/banners/displays in public places such as shopping centres and to try and get new donors involved in giving to the British Red Cross. Initially I was worried as I have never done any sales before – but that was why I was doing it, for the experience. I have always wanted to be in the advertising industry (specifically pitching concepts) and in order to do this I would need to sell myself as well as the idea so this, in theory, is the perfect opportunity to see if I am up to the challenge – well that and if I need a new direction in my future career.

I was told at the end of the group interview that I and one of the two other candidates were successful and were required two days later for a training day. I couldn’t quite believe it, literally two days before I felt so negative and honestly didn’t think anyone wanted to employ me.

The training day was really beneficial; even though I was unsure whether this type of job is suited for me, they made it sound very appealing and put me at ease. We went through their business development programme and even discussed the cash-flow quadrant. It was really interesting, especially as other employees were there and it was a real ‘opportunity’ meeting I found myself in. It’s one thing learning about the inner workings of a business, but it’s very different actually being part of it – they go into so much detail about the elements of the job that I would’ve never thought to, well, think of. I learnt more about the charity and the best techniques to utilise in order to approach people in the right way (also my homework). So I start tomorrow and my nerves are at an all-time high – what if I’m awful at selling? What if the other three new employees are really good? What if I forget what I’m meant to say? Well, only one way to find out I guess…

Reflective coursework – “…but do you have work experience?”

.

I have always worried as to whether I have the ‘right’ formula in place for an interview to end successfully for me. This worry became even more apparent when I found myself going through at least six in the past month or so that all in all resulted in several fruitless and quite frankly disheartening experiences. I felt discouraged and very negative towards the advertising and marketing industry, questioning if it was even the right avenue for me to be approaching. A lot of people I know were getting work experience or internships from exhausting their parents or uncle’s connections. I had attempted to find my own contacts but unfortunately my family are very much un-networked to the point of otiose. Despite seemingly resenting other people having all their connections, I told myself to keep trying and keep trying I did. I had applied for so many that when I (rarely) received responses; I had to double-check what sort of job I was being faced with.

I found myself emailing someone from a company called Cayenne Red, based in Reading. A digital marketing company who were happy to take me on for two weeks? I thought I had finally got my foot in the door, so to speak. It started later in the Easter holidays than I would’ve preferred, but I soon forgot about that when I remembered how hard it was to get even this opportunity. The woman I had been conversing with emailed me to say she had left the company but gave me the manager’s email and confirmed he would be able to answer my questions. He confirmed I had been pencilled in for the week commencing the 23^rd April, which put my mind at rest and got me even more excited about actually having work experience.

That Monday morning came and I was there on time and apprehensively enthusiastic, when the receptionist informed me the manager was in London. He had told the receptionist to tell me to ring him, so I did. I was quite confused by this point, not helped by him sounding like he had forgotten about my arrival. He began asking me questions, one of which I have struggled to understand throughout all of my interviews – “Do you have any work experience?” Surely they know the answer, otherwise why would I be there asking for it? Why would I want work experience if I already had some? Either way he continued with explaining they have a new client in London and asked if I could work in Notting Hill, to which I replied yes however was honest to the point of telling him I wouldn’t be able to afford the travel expenses (I was staying with a friend in Reading as it was). After this he became very distant, but told me to ring him later which I did. This led to him sending me an email to ‘look over’ a list of clients which he hadn’t even attached – I replied asking about it and about what I was going to be doing over the next two weeks to which I received no reply. So that was it. A waste of my time, a waste of my money (spent on train tickets to get there and a bus pass to get to the building) and a waste of my, well, excitement. I felt so deflated, I tried not to take it personally but I couldn’t help but wonder that maybe I was just not cut out for this business – and this was its way of telling me.

The very same day I was contacted by a company I had also applied for work experience with called Marketing Endeavours. They were asking for an interview, so the next day I found myself in Birmingham waiting to go into their office…

‘In Time’ – film review

.

After viewing the trailer for In Time, I just about got the gist of the genre and plot. I wanted to see it as the concept seemed interesting and I was intrigued by the parallels being made by some titling it an anti-capitalism film. As with most anti-capitalism films it can easily be denied or not recognised as it is all underlying subtext; however I feel this film isn’t even subtle about the point that they are (attempting) to make. It has become clear I am not the only one who feels as if they failed their capitalism critique, with Noah Berlatsky (The Atlantic – see bibliography) stating ‘the tagline should be “Occupy Wall Street … enjoy the luxury suites”’.

In the film, time has replaced money as the currency. So instead of paying £3 for a coffee, you’ll be paying with three minutes of your life. Instead of earning money from your job you’ll be earning your life. Instead of lending your friend money you’d be lending them life etc. You get the idea. This is an inspired notion as of course, money is life – without money to keep our basic Maslow Hierarchy needs fulfilled we would be poor and barely living. However, earning your life only begins at the age of 25 as then the people stop aging and automatically begin with a year on their life clock (the ridiculous futuristic green writing on their arm). This I feel is typical of Hollywood – in an ‘idyllic’ world where everyone would look younger than their years. I am not sure about this element; I found it extremely odd as Will Salas’s (Justin Timberlake’s character) mum looks the same age or to be honest even younger than him.

Salas meets a millionaire (with a century of life on his clock) who has had enough of living to the point of giving Will his century and essentially committing suicide. This causes suspicion among the system as suicide and a sudden increase of life (wealth) isn’t the norm. As with the culture of wanting to stay youthful, the concept of suicide and a willingness to die is unheard of – after all, why would you not want to live forever?! As the film progresses, it elaborates somewhat on how the ‘system’ is corrupt and how the poor are being kept poor so the rich can live. As you would when you come into a lot of money, Salas moves time zones (presumably an analogy to counties) to New Greenwich – the most affluent area. The citizens recognise he is a tourist to the area as where he has been used to living with barely any life left he rushed around as oppose to stroll like these people seem to do. Of course by this point we are due the Romeo and Juliet love interest, enter Sylvia Weis (Amanda Seyfried). The star-crossed lovers adhere to the cliché further by neither of them being happy with their life (poor or rich) and instead find happiness by running away together and attempting to bring down the system by becoming revolutionary Robin Hoods – stealing life from banks to give to the population of the poverty-stricken time zones. Oh, and all of this equates in the villain dying and them falling in love – but you knew that already.

Overall, that is the extent of what I remember about the film. The concept was and still is interesting, but they definitely could’ve done more with the plot to make it less predictable and less, well, banal. For this genre predictability should not be one of the features and I feel the director went a bit genre-happy as the film seemed too hybrid, somewhere between action, sci-fi, adventure, crime, political, chick-flick and (attempted) satire. As with most attempts for satirical takes on capitalism, its endeavours are mostly wasted as it ends up invariably supporting the system – it seems it’s a constant losing battle for these film producers that is, until, they sell out in the box office.

Bibliography

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/10/in-time-a-hollywood-get-rich-quick-tale-disguised-as-capitalist-critique/247515/

Narratives and 9/11 reports

.

Where narratives in films are concerned they are typically linear and adhere to Todorov and Propp. However as the well-equipped media student I find myself to be (please no laughing), I am aware this is changing. With the increasing crossover hybrids we are being subjected to, it’s no surprise narratives are becoming more creative and (arguably) more interesting. Films such as Memento, 500 Days of Summer, Inception, Pulp Fiction and Sliding Doors are all seen to be rebelling against the standard codes and conventions of typical narratives. Some would say these are a more, how shall I phrase it, intelligent type of storyline; but surely this is more just due to the increase in concentration that’s needed to follow it as oppose to a direct reflection of the demographic. Don’t get me wrong, Inception was a ground-breaking production in its own way and all kinds of audiences would’ve viewed it, but I personally don’t feel it was as ‘different’ as made out. Most producers seem to create these narratives that may be slightly unusual, market them as an amazingly innovative original concept and therefore sell a lot of cinema tickets.  Personally I feel let down by the majority of these – Inception was good, but after so much hype I was only to be disappointed.

Aside from this demographics were discussed and I was asked how I feel about the representation of mine in the media. Continuing our talk on genres, we considered the rom-coms and how they represent the male roles and the female (potentially my demographic). This genre seems to show women in a positive (but feminist) light and makes it incredibly relatable with all the realistic situations that occur e.g. Bridget Jones eating ice-cream when unhappy etc. This genre’s narrative is highly predictable and because of this it is easy to watch without too much of a thought process, I find I can pretty much miss half of it and still understand it! However if I were to miss parts of Pulp Fiction, I would guarantee my consequent confusion and thereafter unbelievable frustration. It is obvious the codes and conventions of this almost hybrid narrative style generates a lot more interest than typical genres hence why they are constantly being produced. But as with all genres most ideas are being repeated and therefore it’s making these new and amazing conceptualised films only as good as its predecessor – originality is definitely a challenge.

.
9/11 reports (see bibliography for URLs)
As we were reminded repeatedly in our seminar and rightly so, the topic of narrative does not only apply to films. For example many advertisements include them as well as, in this case, news stories. The topic of 2001’s 9/11 terrorist attacks was no doubt one of the most reported events in the last decade and even in my nineteen years of being on this earth (I’m quite sure I remember nothing before the age of 10 but that’s beside the point). Either way the coverage was phenomenal as one would expect, but the difference between the live news and the 10 o’clock news is striking. As I’m sure you’re thinking this is to be expected, but after analysing them closely it became clearer and I noticed key variances I may have overlooked otherwise.

The main difference is that of the script, or there lack of, as the news commentary is expected to be of a particular standard where sentences are concerned. The live clip may be ‘breaking’ news but this led to the quality of report being sacrificed, especially as the reporters had no real knowledge of the event. On the other hand, the BBC clip is retrospective news and there is a typical news story narrative to it. This is alongside a footage montage of reasonable quality and (in my opinion) unnecessary first-hand accounts from already traumatised public who would probably rather do anything else than talk about their current situation. The backstory of the towers is also given with various statistics about the employee population and the known/potential fatalities, making for a script full of yet more disheartening and excessively over-the-top emotive language.

The absence of a narrative in the live report can in a way been seen to be surprisingly advantageous because as the viewers are seeing the footage at the same rate as the reporters, there is an instant connection between institution and audience. This makes it a lot more personal, especially when the comments made by the reporters are likely to reflect how the audience are feeling too. It also has less organisation and therefore minimal opportunities to script and arrange phrasings potentially biasing the report. This is unlike the BBC narrative which includes well thought out editing, camerawork, shot selection and carefully selected political clips. Now I realise how cynical this sounds but yes, I truly believe, even the news uses mediation to their advantage.

Bibliography

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lKZqqSI9-s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPh7ECq9sc0&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLF72AD22BC05DFF3B

Fact – sauna rooms always improve ratings

.

While spending the past week recovering from my fifth bout of tonsillitis since June (it’s been, needless to say, painfully repetitive) and being guiltily coerced into a family camping holiday in Cornwall, I had a break from a lot of things. Now I am not opposed to the idea of camping, far from it. I am and always have been accustom to the idea as my family (of parents and two sisters) and I have attended various music festivals since I was four (if you care it was the very last Phoenix Festival and of which I remember nothing quite frankly). Not surprisingly I could never class my childhood as typical among my peers…

Anyway aside from that tangent, on Thursday night I found myself walking past the room along from the shower block on the campsite that I guess could be described as a small 21st century-friendly room – with a bar and a television. Admittedly we were camping in luxury what with electrical hook-ups, flushable toilets (unlike festival ones) and the basic but still fully functioning and fully appreciated showers – but a television? In my opinion it is the most unnecessary seeming necessity we as a society have been engorged by. Sure, I felt a bit lost without my phone and made sure it was charged but to be honest since we were camping in want for a better phrase, the arse-end of nowhere, there was seemingly no point with the complete lack of signal. Refreshingly, I sometimes find the idea of being non-contactable an enjoyable state of mind. The idea that nobody can reach me wherever I go is, well, peaceful… but I’m very aware this outlook is part of a minority that seemingly only consists of my mum and me. How depressing…

Either way, I would’ve and could’ve accepted these teenage and young adult television viewers if they were watching the news I mean I probably would’ve joined – but no. To my dismay and my appalling memory, Big Brother had begun. How could I have let this important date slip my mind? Quite easily it seems and even with seemingly a week away from the ‘normal’ world of houses with over-comfy sofas and an unnecessary copious amount of over-sized TV screens I could not avoid it. Camping use to be so simple… (Sigh). So despite having a severe dislike for this programme as you may already know (see June 24th entry) I am specifically interested in what Channel 5 have done to (I imagine the producers would describe as) ‘improve’ and ‘enhance’ the programme this time around. To uncover this there is sadly and regrettably one way to find out properly and that is to witness it first-hand… to watch it (cue dramatic sound bite). So, having been back from holiday I have since watched the first episode of this hellish excuse for entertainment (biased, me?). There I have analysed things I find interesting from the music down to the chosen décor. The plan was to thereafter watch a couple more episodes to analyse it further but I actually couldn’t bring myself to do it so I apologise.

.
Thursday 18th August – The Launch (over 5 million viewers)
The programme begins with epic music and equally epic playbacks that the celebrities going into the house have been recorded saying. All of which are incredibly ambiguous phrases and all of which make them sound like they will start up arguments with each other – no surprise there then. Follow this with the new shiny beginning that, putting aside different furniture, is fundamentally the same as the last series. This should be expected however as everything establishing Big Brother as the famous Channel 4 brand it once was (the beginning, the logo, the voiceover etc.) is vital. By doing this it aims to act as reminders and maintain the viewers from Channel 4 as well as them potentially attempting ‘nostalgia’ marketing. The structure of this reality television show is so simple, but it has a lot of competition as currently the reality hybrid that has mass-produced programmes like Made in Chelsea, The Only Way is Essex and Geordie Shore etc. are proving successful with today’s audiences.

Then and I never thought I’d say this, but this series has actually made me harbour a liking for Davina McCall. Although given Brian Dowling’s annoyance factor this comes as no surprise. I get his whole image; you know, the stereotypical overly camp homosexual with characteristics that resemble femininity despite this not even being representative of the society at all… Either way his persona and thereafter mannerisms made me cringe if I’m honest, at least McCall had some sort of charismatic and remotely entertaining personality to accompany her auto cue!

The next few minutes are covered by Dowling giving his overview of the new house. To quote verbatim it includes ‘designer furniture’ a ‘state of the art gym’, ‘deluxe pool’ and even a ‘steamy garden sauna’. The former two make for advertising revenue with produce placement (The Truman Show parallels continue), but even the gym’s presence has more than just that as a motive. All of them in one way or another are to generate more views and I’m fairly sure it’s not just a coincidence they can all be associated with sexual visual stimulates. This, as seen in the previous series typically results in some sort of defamation between housemates and thereafter unrestrained slander from the tabloids. Of course this gains the producers sufficient interest in the programme when footage is shown of the arguments and promiscuous behaviour from the housemates, thus making watchable and entertaining television for viewers.

I know I’m critical, but every decision the producers make has been thought out extensively with particular situations in mind – they just want a profit. A swimming pool is obvious in its sexual nature with housemates in their most revealing swimwear – I mean, it’s been done before. But a sauna room is new for this series and is obviously there to appeal to viewers with the various model and actor/actress housemates that have been chosen by the producers no doubt with their appearance as one of the main reasons they’re in there in the first place. As well as this, whether they deny it and claim they have other motives, the celebrities on this programme are on it to raise their profile in the media. Some do this by instigating certain behaviour in the house to end up in tabloids; this has been done before by glorified quarrels, unchaste acts and arguably racism. Well, they say there’s no such thing as bad publicity…

These additions to the house are guaranteed to raise and probably significantly increase Channel 5’s ratings because they are giving viewers what they want – God-like entertainment on the television. They are just hoping for ‘bad’ behaviour and drama; I mean, why else would they have Amy Child’s strutting down Big Brother’s runway to Britney’s suggestively ambiguous If You Seek Amy? Why else put a self-proclaimed violent gypsy in the house? Why else would paparazzi Darryn Lyons be put in there with celebrities he’s tarnished in the papers? And why else leave Kerry Katona on her own in the house with bottles of wine (given her history) and consequently have Dowling announcing it? I imagine secretly they want her to crash and burn and, let’s face it, viewers do too.

Bibliography

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/54638000/jpg/_54638304_brother.jpg

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/19/celebrity-big-brother

Where the people are, advertisers (and riots) must follow

.

So, is the internet making us as a society more socially adept? For most the obvious answer is simply no because it seems like an obvious contradiction is being made. However, research has recently shown that ‘social networks and access to information bring people together and keep us sociable’. Presumably some of this would be in the form of Facebook ‘events’ that I seem to receive invitations to all the time. Not in an I’m-so-popular way more in a most-of it-is-rubbish-that-I-would-never-attend way. Now I understand how these Facebook events could help heighten the amount of real life socialising, but then my friend informed me they were invited to a funeral on a social networking site I feel there is or at least should be a limit to this method. I mean an online invitation to a funeral? That just seems insensitively perverse, even to the likes of me who appreciates some of the humour on Sikipedia (emphasis on the word ‘some’ I might add).

Stefan Bauernschuster (Ifo Institute in Munich) explains that their study revealed ‘a broadband connection at home positively influences the social activities of adults as well as children’. Their findings also showed that once adults had access to broadband there was a significant increase in the amount of theatre, cinema, bar and restaurant outings made. I can see and comprehend this correlation, but surely it’s just elements like the availability of information such as phone numbers and the ability to book tickets online that is making these statistics what there are. Yes, this is the internet’s doing but I only feel to an extent. For example, if we hadn’t created the marvel that is branded Web 2.0 then no doubt the information found on the internet would be elsewhere; be it newspaper or television. We would make do with what we have like how we did before we had the internet. I know this is my opinion, but what if there’s just been an increase in social activities? I agree the correlation exists but I feel it is just the ease to which we can acquire information online as well as the subjection to more online advertisements for activities etc. aiding the parallel. Literally being able to find out anything whenever with the click of a mouse and touch of a few keys is bound to change society’s way of functioning socially, but does that justify the amount of hours people spend wrapped up in technology? With a reported 57% of UK households having access to broadband by the end of June 2011 and on average users spending around 50 hours at their computer in April 2011 (equivalent to 1 hour and 40 minutes a day), maybe Britain’s constantly increasing love affair with technology is becoming increasingly unhealthy? Recently and on a less positive nod towards the internet, social networking sites are now being blamed in aiding the London riots that have spread across the Country this week. With Blackberry Messenger reported to be the most ‘covert’ method of rallying the violence as well as Twitter users encouraging the riots, social media is shown not necessarily to have positive or remotely constructive consequences. If this is true and judging by the evidence given on the news it is, these companies are going to have a lot to answer for when (hopefully soon) this all blows over. It just shows the extent of how powerful and influential this social media can make individual’s opinions which, clearly, is not always a good thing as we and David Cameron are finding out.

Don’t get me wrong, I know the internet (be it on a smartphone or computer) can aid non-cyber social interactions but what if this changes? With the steady increase of dating websites there seems to be a pretty significant market that are relying on the internet for a lot of elements in
their life. It seems that the internet is useful and amazing etc. but the problem now arising is the obvious reliance for the internet we have and no doubt are going to continue to maintain. With elements of the reported ‘Web 3.0’ (aka The Semantic Web) being observed and realised, it is obvious the internet has come a long way. See below a diagram explaining the differences, further illustrating the success this platform will have if it fully reaches Web 3.0 (which no doubt it will). Some say it has already begun while continuing to pursue existing memes as well as creating new ones to develop and change the fabric of our internet culture. As a philosopher once observed ‘fish are probably not very curious about water’, therefore why should I or anyone be curious and questioning the web at all?

Bibliography

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/aug/07/logging-on-makes-us-sociable

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/aug/07/web-2-platform-end-naughton

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/14417937

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/aug/04/facebook-twitter-iphone-blackberry-addiction-ofcom

http://www.labnol.org/internet/web-3-concepts-explained/8908/

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01967/shop_1967322b.jpg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-14457809