not multi-tasking is stupid.

I’m attempting to write this blog, as I listen to Chris Brown’s newest mixtape, check Facebook and Twitter, and attempt to read chapters for assigned reading. And I just turned off the TV, it was distracting me. Once, I really start to get into writing this blog, I turn everything off. Because as much as I try, I can’t effectively multi-task when it comes to writing papers, I need complete silence. However, when it comes to eating; I need the hum of the Television.

I started the experiment around 11:00 on black Friday. Since I had no definite plans, or money to go shopping I figured this would be easy. My plan was to watch movies all day. In, retrospect, this was perhaps the stupidest thing I could have done, but I learned the impact TV really has on me.

The First Half
I wake up, my mom has made breakfast. My sister and her are in the living room eating in front of the TV like usual. I eat in the dining room. I have to clear a space on the dining room, because it’s literally a table that holds things. We rarely eat at the table. This is annoying because “Space Jam” has just came on TV and I hadn’t seen that movie in a long time. So I try to wolf down my food so that I won’t miss too much of “Space Jam”. However, my sister Nekia keeps talking to me. I tell her about my project and how I can’t talk and eat at the same time. She narrows her eyes and says, “Imma make you talk.” And proceeds to ask me questions and be annoying. I finish my breakfast and go sit in the Living Room and watch “Space Jam”.
My mother then tries to talk to me, I explain the project to her and she sounds interested, but she continues to talk to me throughout the entire movie. I have to fight the urge to talk to her, because I realize how much bonding time we share, sitting in front of the TV watching movies together and analyzing them. Most of the movies I’ve watched in my life, have been with my mother, she’s always right beside explaining things about the movie, or asking questions. So not being able to communicate during the movie was extremely hard for both of us. Besides, I’m infamous, for talking during movies.
We watch, “Space Jam”, “Legion” and “The Road” back to back. While I usually can sit in front of the TV for about 6 hours straight, I find myself becoming hungry. But because I know I can’t eat and watch TV at the same time, I don’t eat anything. However I do drink water, and I turn my back to the TV to drink water, so I don’t feel like I’m cheating. I talk much more than I should have during those three movies so I would give myself an accuracy rating of 55% for the first half of the day because I honestly tried.

The Car Ride
I decide to go visit my friend Paige around 5:00. So I get in the car and drive to her house without any music. This was actually relaxing, because I get tired of hearing the same songs on the radio every day. While driving, I noticed I do drive a little fast. And I pay very little attention to where I’m actually going, because I usually rely on the GPS or someone else to tell me where I’m going. Once I pull up to her house another friend calls me, and I turn off my car, and sit and talk to her for about 30 minutes. This isn’t unusual though; I usual can’t talk on the phone and do other thing, that’s just rude. I give myself am accuracy rating of 100% for the car ride.

Second Half
The second half, I willingly gave up on, I knew it would be way too much to pull off and I was simply exhausted at trying to uni-task; which seems to be harder than multi-tasking! When I got into Paige’s house we went into the kitchen, she fixed us plates of Thanksgiving leftovers, I talked. I was doing well, but then she said lets, go into the living room to eat. And I knew it wasn’t even worth explaining. Because people love to eat in front of the TV! So yes, I gave up. At exactly, 5:30 I failed my experiment.

Results
Apparently, I have a slight attention disorder. Throughout the experiment, I kept notes of things I noticed about myself and others.

“Kia keeps talking to me”
“In “Space Jam”, there was one line that featured product placement of Hanes, Wheaties, Nike and McDonalds.”
“When I’m in front of the TV, I’m hungry, when I’m not in front of it, I’m not.”
“Legion is a horrible movie, why do the angels speak in Shakespearean language?”
“This is going horribly.”
“I’ve officially failed. Not multi-tasking is stupid.”

“Multitasking makes us feel efficient” according to Jacobs essay, but I realized that, while I don’t multi-task as much as others, for me it’s not a feeling of accomplishment or efficiency. It simple makes the experience better. Had this experiment taken place during a school day, it would have not been as hard. I’m not a good multi-tasker, anyway. I can’t read and listen to music at the same time, nor can I text and drive. But eating, watching TV and talking at the same time are my weakness. It’s what I do best. Watching a movie and talking to other people who are watching it with me, makes what I’m watching seem more like a shared experience. When I watch a movie with my friends and family and we all laugh at a joke, we’ll repeat it, it becomes an inside/running joke that makes us that much closer. I learn about human behaviors through watching a movie and talking about as it happens, I bond with the characters, predict endings and criticize bad ones. Watching a movie in silence is just lonely, and dumb, and not as fun. Lynn Spiegel’s essay, “Making Room for TV”, “Television, it was said, would bring the family ever closer,” and in my opinion it always has.
The eating part I can’t really explain, but I’m just naturally hungrier watching TV, perhaps the millions of fast food commercials. It’s also an absent minded thing, that’s just a hard temptation to fight. Because lounging on the couch and watching TV is complimented by a nice bag of greasy chips. It’s like a mini vacation, where you can just zone out.
However, I was much more focused on what I was doing at the time when I was uni-tasking. But, that did not make the task more fun. My connections to people were stronger, and I realized how much I tune out when I talk to certain people. But I already knew that. And usually if I’m talking to people and start “multi-tasking” it’s on purpose, because they’re boring me.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the experiment was fun. I wish I had more of a plan going into this, though. I underestimated how much I actually multi-task in life. It’s because I do it so often it comes naturally now, so I don’t even know if I’m actually “multi-tasking”. However, I will make more of an effort to eat without watching TV. I’ve realized my addiction to TV is getting slightly out of hand; if I can only eat, when I’m in front of a television. I’m planning on trying this experiment again, perhaps over the Christmas break, and hopefully, I can stick with it.

Speigel, Lynn. 2010. "Making Room for TV". Communication in History.Sixth Edition. 2010
Jacobs, AJ. "How I Stopped the Multitasking Madness" Retrieved November 27 2010. (http://www.realsimple.com/work-life/life-strategies/time-management/stop-the-madness-00000000020965/index.html)

Can Beat Em? Join Em!

According to Henry Jenkins in his essay “TV in the Net-Age” TV watchers are separated into three groups;
“Zappers are people who constantly flit across the dial-watching snippets of shows rather than sitting down for a prolonged engagement. Loyal’s actually watch fewer hours of television each week than the general population…Casuals fall somewhere in between; they watch a particular series when they think of it or have nothing better to do.” (Jenkins).

I am a casual loyalist when it comes to my TV watching pattern. I only seriously watch two shows. I started since the show premiered and always watch it. Those two shows are NBC’s “Community” and HBO’s “TruBlood”. I started watching both with my mother. I would say she watches the most TV out of my household. I really loved those shows since the beginning so I never miss an episode. I try to catch reruns if I do, and watch it online when I can. I’ve even considered getting DVD’s of certain seasons, although I usually only watch an episode once. I love watching “Spongebob”, “Martin” and the “Golden Girls”, but I only watch it when I can, it’s not a priority. I tend to channel surf a lot until I find a movie I haven’t seen before or a show that holds my interest. But I don’t watch as much TV as I used to.


I would say technology has certainly changed the way we watch TV. It competes with the internet for attention, because most of the shows you watch on TV you can find online. However, the television has a few advantages. Most television screens are bigger than computer screens, so watching TV with another person is usually more enjoyable than if you were watching it on a small computer screen with others. Personally, I love to stretch out and watch TV because we have a huge TV. When I stretch out and get comfortable to watch anything on my laptop, it’s usually a bed and it usually results in me falling fast asleep. For me watching television is a much more relaxing activity. On the internet, I have to seek out content whereas the TV delivers it straight to me. It’s much more comfortable that way.


However, the internet does have its advantages. The content is broader than what you’d find on TV. And you have the unique experience of reading and contributing your own feedback. After I watched District Nine online, I had my own thoughts about what I thought the underlying message was, and I wanted to see if others felt the same way. I didn’t have to wait to read the paper the next day, and read a critic’s view. I could read the audience’s view and opinion, like I was in the theater with them.


The meaning and impact of television hasn’t changed…yet. It’s still the center of the physical household. If anything, the computer is trying to become more like the Television. There are hybrids being sold now. It’s basically an enlarged computer screen, or an extremely interactive television. Either way it combined both devices into one. This seems only natural since the computer doesn’t seem able to beat the television, is might as well join it.

Jenkins, Henry. 2010 “TV in the Net-Age” Communication in History, Sixth Edition. 2010

The Extension of Man

The medium is the message means that although an invention was created for a certain purpose its true “message” is the deeper social or culture change it will bring to an unknowing society. “It is not the content or use of the innovation, but the change in inter-personal dynamics that the innovation brings with it”(Federman).
Lets’ use Twitter as an example. Twitter was created by Jack Dorsey in 2008 and in only 2 years acquired more than 175 million users. While its cultural impacts are still being created and it’s “McLuhan Message” has yet to be seen it’s already caused changes in society.


The traditional medium of Twitter, is the internet. And I guess the message behind Twitter is whatever, the user wants it to be. The universal message could be “now you have even more freedom of speech.” However, the “McLuhan medium” of twitter would be the ability it gives human to put their voices and thoughts literally into the floating space that is the internet. When you tweet, no one has to acknowledge it. But you can be sure someone read it. It’s literally like writing in a diary and showing it to the world; whether they give you feedback on what you write is up to them. The “McLuhan message” is the change this new medium can bring.
Other “McLuhan Messages” could possibly be the strange phenomena of people suddenly having nothing to talk about in person, because they already tweeted it and held conversations on the internet. Or perhaps people will lose the ability to filter their selves because of the freedom that twitter gives its users. Or perhaps one day a Trending Topic on Twitter will inspire a turn of events that will change the world. While that has yet to be seen, Federman summed it up best when he said “ a medium - this extension of our body or senses or mind - is anything from which a change emerges.”


When the car was invented it was simply an extension of the human’s legs and it was intended to help us get from one place to another, as well as replace our dependence on horse and buggies. However one unanticipated consequence that came with our dependence on automobiles was the fact that combined with alcohol driving automobiles results in death. Alcohol related deaths are the number cause of death of young Americans. When the car was first invented and popularized the society did not realize that one day in the future, driving could possibly mean the end of your life, even if you haven’t been drinking. In fact, once society did realize this fact it took years for people to stop drunk driving. And to date thousands still die from it.


In relation to radio the “McLuhan Message” is found in the innovative idea of having advertisers pay for radio. In her essay “Early Radio”, Susan Douglas reminds us, “…there was nothing inevitable about the way radio came to be financed and regulated. This was a contested process, with educators and labor organizers, corporate interests, amateur operators, and the government all advancing their very different visions for the future.”In the beginning, the innovators thought their idea would bring about revenue and more opportunities for radio. They did not think about the impending annoyance their audience would face from the constant advertisements. Radio which was possibly one of the last of the personal media devices until the iPod was invented was like a refuge from the world. At the time TV was neglecting a lot of its fans and being that radio was localized one could feel at “home” when listening to it. Decades later, devices such as personal CD players, walkmans, iPods and TiVo would all be invented to stop the uncontrollable influx of advertisements which, at first, seemed like such a good idea.
In conclusion, “McLuhan Messages” are being discovered in our media every day. Because the messages are so un-obvious and occur through changes in society, they take years to notice. But the fact that we can see the change and acknowledge its happenings means that the society is still able to change which is always a good thing.

Douglas, Susan. “Early Radio” Communication in History Sixth Edition 2011
Federman, M. (2004, July 23). What is the Meaning of the Medium is the Message? Retrieved from http://individual.utoronto.ca/markfederman/article_mediumisthemessage.htm .

"LEVI's" the jean of the Blue Collar Blogger

The ad is a black and white picture of a black male with dreads, and a younger male family member. The grown male is getting dressed for work and the young boy is helping him put on his shirt. The young boy is standing on the bed to help the older male button his shirt, they are in a scarcely furnished bedroom. There are white words written across the picture that says “Everyone’s work is equally important.” The traditional Levi’s tag is under the words “Braddock, PA” in the lower right hand corner.
To thoroughly analyze this ad I will be using the Frith method

Surface Meaning:
A black father and son are up and getting ready for another day of work.

Intended Meaning
Levi’s is for EVERY man; even a black man and his son in Braddock PA. Regardless of your occupation Levi’s jeans are intended for men who work. This ad is selling a lifestyle, or implying that they represent a lifestyle. The lifestyle represented in this ad is one of men who take care of their family and work.

Cultural or Ideological Meaning
First, the fact that Levi’s shows a black man who lives with his son getting up early to go to work breaks two cultural stereotypes immediately. Traditionally, this ad would feature a white man and his son. Second, the son is not helping the father put on a tie, he’s simply putting on a denim shirt over denim jeans to go to work. Where does the father work? Construction worker? Store owner? Drug Dealer? Because the location is written in the bottom right corner and Braddock PA is a small town, destitute old “American” city, it is expected that most of the men who live there work “blue collar” jobs. The ironic part is that Braddock is a town that became destitute after the loss of those “blue collar” jobs, I.E factories, and steel mills. So where is this young father really going off to this early in the morning? That depends on the reader. The Walt Whitman’s quote “Everyone’s work is important” really plays with the reader’s mind. Young black male with no suit or tie going to work, reads as if his “work” is illegal. That plays into the stereotype of black men not having “corporate or desirable” jobs. But at the same time, the use of the Walt Whitman quotes implies that even if your job is “illegal” it’s still important. Also, because this “illegal” job is not blatant, the ad really plays with the readers mind. If you assume he’s going to sell drugs on the corner, what does this say about the reader? If the ad featured a young white, or Asian father would it be assumed that his “work” was to sell drugs?

In the bedroom, there are no pictures on the wall only a lone lamp and a window with the blind pulled down. There is no headboard on the bed either. This bedroom implies that they are a working class family and possibly poor. There are also no women present; this gives the ad a male bonding feeling. The father could quite possibly be a single dad. It also evokes nostalgic images being that the picture is in black and white and the father is up early going to work. This ad stands out and grabs the reader attention subtly because it plays on the assumption that the average reader subscribes to stereotypes. One being that black men aren’t in their children’s life, and that they don’t work. Both stereotypes are challenged in this ad. I think it would be less surprising if it were a black women getting up early and her child helping her put on her clothes. The fact that the company behind the ad is Levi’s also speaks volumes about what direction they are trying to go with this campaign. The complete underlying message would be something like “although you are a young single poor black father living in destitute Braddock PA, you should still buy Levi’s.”
Levi’s would like for the reader to think that the most important part of this ad is the connection between the father and son; i.e. raising a child, parenthood. The connection between father and son stands out the most in the picture; the jeans are actually cut off in the ad. However, everything about the ad evokes seriousness and almost sadness; neither men are smiling, they look almost tired. As if they both know they have a long hard day ahead of them. While these are parts of parenthood, it makes me wonder if the focus of the ad was really about “parenthood” if so, why don’t they look happier? Anyway, the ad effectively touches the reader while coming across as a social statement rather than an advertisement. And I actually like it.

“Go Forth?”
While this is a very nice ad, it’s the ONLY print ad that solely features a black father and son. And the ad was featured on a billboard in Oakland. Targeting much "Levi's"?
Apparently there is a quite a buzz about Levi’s new go forth campaign. When the campaign was first launched by Wieden+Kennedy for Levi’s it featuring young white skinny hipsters running through traditionally “American” green pastures and fields with inspirational quotes scribbled across the ads like “All I Need is all I Got” and “This country was not built by men in suits”. While the intentions seemed nice, the problem was the lack of ethnicities featured in the campaign. And of the minorities represented, they felt specifically placed, the campaign in general felt very contrived. Also, in most of the advertisements, the words were about “working” but the people in the ad were playing and running. The campaign had all the right images to effectively get a point across but they did a horrible job at portraying sincerity.

Take II

With the revitalization of the campaign “Levi’s” has made Braddock , PA the setting for all of its advertisements. This city is going through its own revitalization; it’s lost 90% of its populations since it closed most of its factories in the 70’s and the 80’s. Most of the new Levi ads feature the landscape of Braddock and some citizens. However, the campaign has led a few to believe there is an actual Levi’s factory in Braddock, which is completely untrue. But the company had vowed to donate 2 million to the city over two years. It also sponsors an hour long show that will be played on IFC and the Sundance Channel which highlights the city’s revitalization efforts. So, kudos to you, “Levi’s”.
However, everyone knows no good deed goes unpunished. The cynical American public seems to distrust this sudden interest in a small town. Apparently, it’s believed that “Levi’s” is exploiting the poverty Braddock PA to come across as a socially conscious big corporation (as if that’s possible). Some believe that if “Levi’s” really wants to help Braddock they should open an actual factory there; since “Levi’s” claims there jeans are made in America (they’re actually made in Mexico). The biggest concern from the public is the transparency in the campaign. “Levi’s” is trying to come across as a sincere company that cares and in turn is coming across as the opposite. At least to people who only see the ads. The ad I described before is powered by shock value, “Levi’s” is playing on the concept that no one would expect an ad featuring a black father and son from an historically “white” brand. The ad campaign is so spectacular that the print ads look like “hipster” postcards. But, is that really a bad thing? “Levi’s” is obviously targeting the young college age “individual” who believes they can change their world from their Mac-book. The only problem is that the “blue collar work ethic” "Levi's" is promoting in their ads is something their target audience knows nothing about.

Frith, Katherine. Undressing the Ad: Reading Culture in Advertising Retrived November 3, 2010. (http://blackboard.umbc.edu/bbcswebdav/courses/MCS222_4106_FA2010/Frith1.pdf)