Future of nations, the children – influenced by Celebrity Culture

The article “Teenagers most influenced by celebrities” (The telegraph, 2009) surveyed 18000 students in the UK and concluded that the children are most influenced by celebrities; and that the students have no sense of local community or culture. I see this on the train every day. While travelling to and from the university; I travel with a lot of students travelling to or from the school. I cannot help but overhear most of them talking about footy players, cricket players, Hollywood stars and Paris Hilton. I can very much tell the influence of celebrities when I see boys struggling to be the alpha male of the group and twelve year old girls with so much make-up as if they were going to a prom party in the 80s. In fact, I should look in my own den first; my 3 year daughter son tells me “Hanna Montana is the best girl in the world”.

Marshall (2010) says that we are moving into a Specular Economy where we are collectively becoming more conscious of how we represent ourselves. The children are obviously more prone to the influence as they get more and more exposure to the celebrity culture via the TV, internet, social media and the celebrity friends.

According to the Daily Mail (15 April 2009), “Unruly pupils are copying the worst behaviour they see from footballers and celebrities on television, the Government's discipline tsar said today”.

Image Source: Daily Mail UK, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1169946/Celebrity-culture-fuelling-violence-sex-children-says-schools-tsar.html

References

Daily Mail Report, 2009, 'Celebrity culture is fuelling violence and sex among children, says school tsar', Mail Online, 15 April, first edition, viewed 1 September 2012, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1169946/Celebrity-culture-fuelling-violence-sex-children-says-schools-tsar.html

Marshall, D P, 2010, "The Specular Economy: Celebrity, two-way mirrors and the personalization of renown", Society. Vol. 50, September/October, 2010

Effectiveness of narrowcasting in the production of diasporic media

The cultures are influenced by the mass media. After TV, Internet is a prime example of how much the cultures are influenced by mass media.

Narrowcasting refers to broadcasting to a very narrow range of audience (Legendre et al, 2008, p1).  The authors go on to provide some examples of how narrowcasting can be achieved. Some examples include requiring the users to register with cable TV, mailing lists and electronic forums. YouTube channels to me are a perfect example of narrowcasting.

I am from Saudi Arabia and I came to Australia about 3 years ago. I was coming to a new country and a new culture; something that I had experienced never before. I used Internet as the primary form of research to find out what to expect, how to behave, how to speak, what I will be eating and how I can make friends. I watch videos specifically targeted towards people who are arriving in Australia on YouTube. I read blogs. I read news articles. I read university’s guide to settling in Australia. All of these sources from the Internet and narrowcasted towards people looking to settle in Australia.

Can we see the connection between me, narrowcasting and diasporic media yet? The specific material I used to learn about Australian culture embedded certain Australian customs and values in my core beliefs. In that way, the diasporic media helped promote the Australian values and the customs to me before I had arrived. I did not try to change the Australian Culture; I could settle into the existing Australian culture.

Department of Immigration and Citizenship, People our Business http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6jA_nQ2qGM&feature=relmfu

References:

Lengender, F, May, M, Lenders, V and Karlsson (2008). Narrowcasting: An Empirical Performance Evaluation Study. Read online on 26 August 2012 at http://www.lenders.ch/publications/conferences/chants08.pdf

Department of Immigration and Citizenship, People our Business http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6jA_nQ2qGM&feature=relmfu

Twittersphere, Blogsphere: Contemporary Public Sphere?

The idea of public sphere comes from the publication The Structural Transformation of the public sphere by Habermas (1962, p7).  Habermas put forward the idea of public spheres as people getting together in a public place to form a common understanding of an opinion; the common understanding sometimes leading to certain actions by the state.

The original idea of public spheres is probably not relevant any more with the advent of internet technologies such as Twittersphere and Blogsphere (Ferree et al. 2002, p.299). The internet allows people to publish their opinions, provide opinions in response to people’s opinions and join virtual groups that support a particular opinion (notice my extensive use of word opinion, I have also believed that everything posted by common individuals on the web space is nothing more than opinion). For example, a user may write a tweet post that can potentially be read and subscribed to by millions on users within minutes.

The question however is, are the contemporary spheres of twitter and blogs truly provide the complete freedom of expression? Have a read of the following news item

http://www.begadistrictnews.com.au/story/161508/kelly-sued-over-tweet/

I won’t go into the specifics of the news item. The point is that someone was sued over what they said on twitter. Does it mean twitter doesn’t allow for freedom of expression and isn’t a truly contemporary public sphere?

I think internet in general (including twittersphere and blogsphere) is a great replacement of the concept of public sphere; a medium that knows no boundaries. However, we do have to be considerate of others in this space.

 

[Image Source: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWQWSBq_Cec2IN-t3uP_U0IpAo7QqmQ191gA_sFCedQ-gSDAEj9slxR4Jf629wzHAEPdOnZLnXmxzjBg07R27zbDeKdko9PaDmkerULYFsD3uNf2JHrjcbIjlue4V8CGcm_-rwD_brzLk/s400/twitter-bird-size-icons-group.jpg]

References:

Habermas, J. (1962/1995). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge: Mit Press.

Marx Ferree, M., Gamson, W. A., Gerhards, J., & Rucht, D. (2002). Four models of the public sphere in modern democracies. Theory and society, 31(3), 289–324. (p. 299).

Schwarz, K (2012). Kelly Sued over Tweet. Online on 21 August 2012 at http://www.begadistrictnews.com.au/story/161508/kelly-sued-over-tweet/

Mateship – How I fell in love with Australia!

The concept of Mateship is the Australian cultural idiom that embodies equality, loyalty and friendship (Caroll, 1982). I have read so many things about complex cultures and the associated beliefs, values and ideologies. I have found these overwhelmingly difficult at times to understand why the cultures need to be so complex.

I then came to Australia to study. I feel in love with the easy going nature of the people, the friendly nature and the acceptance that everyone receives. The celebrations, the problems, the sorry, the thank you; it’s all manageable with the ‘No Worries Mate’. No one is overly serious. I absolutely love it.

The big question to me is how the Australian culture of mateship is going to evolve with the increasing migration levels and people arriving in Australia from different parts of the culture, different backgrounds and different beliefs. I am not necessarily implying that the Australian cultural will be impacted in a negative way. I only hope that people coming into Australia can realise the importance and the power of simplicity that the mateship culture is.

Hats off to the simplicity and easy going attribute of the Australian culture.

References

Carroll, John (1982). Intruders In The Bush: The Australian Quest For Identity (2nd ed.). South Melbourne, VIC: Oxford University Press. p. 114. ISBN 0-19-553374-7.

Between a Hard Rock and a Place. Cam Harris Blog. Online on 13 August 2012 at http://camharris.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/mate.jpg

Trademark Laws

A trademark is defined as a right that is granted to give an organization exclusive right to commercially use, license or sell it for goods and services that it is registered under (IP Australia).

The companies are treating the protection of their trademarks with a lot of seriousness. The 240 Million dollar lawsuit by the Chinese company Proview Technology against Apple Inc in 2007 is an example of how serious the violation of trademark rights can be.

The violation of trademarks may be performed by organizations on purpose or in innocence. I think the primary results for this violation may include lack of education and not being aware of serious consequences. The organizations need to be aware of the laws relating to Trademark. For example, in Australia, the Intellectual Property Australia website provides comprehensive information and help for organizations to understand their both obligations and rights about fair use of trademark.

I was researching for this blog and found these cartoon images that say a lot about different people’s and organization’s understanding of trademarks and what they mean. This tells me that there’s significant lack of education about Trademarks, especially when it comes to common people. After all, it is the common people that go on to become the employees of companies and end up making decisions on protecting and breaching the trademark rights; well not Paris Hilton.

Cartoon images retrieved on 5 August 2012 from http://www.macnn.com/blogs/2007/10/18/apple-files-for-iphone-design-trademark-protection.html

 

References

Trade Marks. IP Australia, Government of Australia. Viewed online at 5 August on http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/get-the-right-ip/trade-marks/

Apple in lawsuit over iPad trademark infringement, 7 February 2012. Viewed online at 5 August on http://www.china.org.cn/business/2012-02/07/content_24570151.htm