Obama! I choose you!

For the last blog post, I am going to end off with the upcoming and much talked about US Presidential Election 2008! Check this out!

Barack Obama- A 2008 presidential candidate hopeful.

Looks like 3 big US newspapers support Barack Obama (you do know who he is right?) for the next President of the United States!

Los Angeles Times

Washington Post

Chicago Tribune

Other influential people such as the former Secretary of State Colin Powell has also endorsed Obama. Meanwhile, other US newspapers have also endorsed John McCain, Obama's rival in the presidential bid.

Behold the printing press-the source of power for newspapers!

We are all familiar with the concept of endorsement. We have Olympics athletes endorsing certain products. Many soccer teams endorse various other companies which in turn, provide funding and other forms of financial support. Endorsement itself is similar to advertising. The difference is that in endorsement, you have an influential entity supporting the use or purchase of a product. In fact, endorsement is actually a type of advertising, if you look at it in that sense. Tiger Woods endorsing a watch is an advertisement too.

Now, we have newspapers endorsing presidential candidates. This time the subject which is being endorsed is not a product but a person. A presidential candidate to be precise. The endorser is none other than a newspaper, which is a source of media. I find this extremely odd and this brings into mind some of the media theories in communications.

John McCain, another 2008 presidential candidate, also has his share of newspaper endorsers.

According to Charles Wright, the media has 4 purposes. Namely to inform (surveillance), provide analysis (correlation), educate (cultural transmission), and lastly, to provide entertainment. If this is the case, what is the media trying to do when they endorse a presidential candidate? Ideally, the media is supposed to report unbiased news and the truth. Of course, this is unlikely in reality. The act of endorsing Obama means that the newspaper is biased against McCain and in support of Obama.

In the agenda setting function of media theories of communication, we learn that media content has many influences. These include political groups. Many political groups will benefit if they have the endorsement of a prominent media source. This is because the media is a powerful tool in influencing the minds of the audience. This is emphasized especially in the powerful effects theory. In this case, the pro-Obama newspapers will tend to convince its readers that Obama is a better choice for president than McCain. Assuming all the readers follow their newspapers' line, Obama would have gained millions of supporters.

Many Muslims consider graphical depictions of Prophet Muhammad as extremely offensive.

There are many issues concerning the media in the world today. Apart from this endorsing of presedential candidates, the issue of the freedom of speech is still another major one. Remember the uproar caused when a Danish newspaper published comics depicting Prophet Muhammad? Many Muslims (including myself) find that those depictions of the Prophet as something offensive. In this case, should we support censorship or freedom of speech? What do you think the media should be like? Should the media stick to reporting unbiased truth? Or should it be free to report whatever it likes? Is there a place for the government in the media process or should censorship be a thing of the past? Your views, your world!

As this may be the last post for this blog, I bid you guys farewell from the blogging world. I sincerely thank you wonderful people for commenting on my blog. If you have anything else you would like to discuss with me, please feel free to contact me! My email is somewhere around here...look for it yourself!

Don't worry kids, it is kosher!

Alright for today, let us talk about handphones!

Ok, so it is not entirely about handphones...

To sum things up in that article, the traditional ultra-Orthodox Jewish community has come up with various ways to counter the problems brought around by new technologies and advances in communication. Some of the ways include automatic filtering of Internet websites and phone numbers.

Some Haredi Jews. Note their hats and beards.

The ultra-Orthodox community, or Haredi, differs from mainstream Israeli society through their beliefs and practices. Many Haredi homes have no TV or radio. They wear traditional clothes and spend their time studying Jewish scriptures. Previously, they felt that technologies such as phones and TVs are not kosher (you do know what is the meaning of kosher right?) because it may have unsuitable content, such as pornography and gambling. Since photos of women are forbidden, it is not surprising that many Internet websites are avoided by the Haredi people.

One of the most common symbols of kosher in the USA is that of the Union of Orthodox Congregations.

I feel that this is a good example of how culture affects communication. You can see how the Haredi willingly avoid various communication technologies such as handphones and the Internet. Culture affects perception or interpretation of reality here. They view SMSing and taking photos as activities that promote "immodest" behavior, such as illicit communication between male and female youth. To many other cultures like our own, such views are considered unusual. This is because in our culture, mingling between the sexes is the norm.

Culture also affects behavior, as seen by their practices. As Edward T. Hall states, culture influences our behavior. If you were a Haredi male, much of your time will probably be spent learning the Torah. In contrast, what do you spend your time on? Since our culture is not based off the Jewish religion, it is highly likely that you do not pass your free time reading the Torah.

What happens when 2 different cultures meet? Well, you may experience culture shock. I am sure that news of many Haredi Jews not owning a TV or radio willingly may come as a surprise or shock to you. It was certainly a surprise for me. (yeah blame me for being ignorant) Likewise, they will also be shocked at how the different sexes mingle and communicate freely in public. This is because we are so used to what we see as the norm, which is actually dictated by what culture we have.

Beware of culture shocks!

Another thing that may happen is the formation of stereotypes. After reading this, some of you may have the assumption that the Haredi Jews are a backward and unmodernised people. This is an example of plain old stereotyping. First off, we interpret their rejection of communications technology negatively. We come to that conclusion without thinking about their side of the story. In any case, the article shows that they are finding ways to integrate these new technologies without compromising their beliefs. Secondly, we tend to exaggerate and polarise whenever we experience something different. Thus, in our minds, we exaggerate this issue and end up thinking that all Haredi Jews avoid handphones like the plague. This is again not true as many of them already use handphones for business and such.

As you can see, culture clearly influences us in many ways. Not only does our own culture affect us, other cultures do as well. For example, I am certain many of you respect your Muslim friends and eat at Halal places when you are chilling out with them. Sometimes, we may accidently end up offending those from another culture. Talking about Israel, Jewish-Arab riots have rocked the coastal town of Acre for the past few days. The incident was sparked off when an Arab driver drove his car into a Jewish neighbourhood during the Jewish Yom Kippur festival. Since religious Jews consider driving during the festival offensive, the driver was attacked by some Jewish extremists. This is a sad example of how we must respect other cultures, lest we offend them.

Some cars were smashed during the Jewish-Arab riots in Acre.

Last of all, I am going to end of by touching upon ethnocentrism. To those of you thinking that our culture is superior to others, a few words of warning. In my opinion, ethnocentrism is not far from racism. The Nazis were incredibly racist and looked what happened. You do not want something like that to happen now, would you?

All Hail Big Brother!

Ok, I am going to take a break from all those complicated stuff in my previous posts.
Instead, I am going to talk about one of my favourite books! Allow me to introduce 1984 by George Orwell!

For those who have not read it, the book is about life under a totalitarian regime. If you are looking for a good read to pass the time (as if you do not have enough school work already), I seriously suggest picking up a copy of the book. It was also made into a movie.

More information on the book can be conveniently found on Wikipedia!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_new_world

Big Brother is watching you...

In essence, this story is about conforming to the beliefs of the dominant group, which would be The Party in this case. The Party is a large political group which is in control of Oceania which includes the former United Kingdom, which the book is set in. Its leader is a mysterious man known only as Big Brother who is never seen in person. Winston, the main character, constantly questions life under the rule of The Party and his role in the running of The Party. He resists falling prey to groupthink or rather blind patriotism to the The Party. The more he questions The Party, the more he starts to disassociate himself from the group.

As mentioned, Winston constantly ponders about the consequences of his wavering loyalty to the The Party. For example, he debates whether it is beneficial for him to keep a diary when Party doctrine discourages this. This can come under the problem of individual vs. group needs. He measures the rewards gained from being true to the Party and this evaluation determines his loyalty to the group. I believe this is one reason why some people may not be committed to their social or work groups. There is an imbalance between effort and reward.

Winston also has to cope with group pressure throughout the entire book. From time to time, he would try to acquire idiosyncrasy points by conforming. (if anything this puts his mind at ease, I doubt the Party even cares) For instance, he sometimes takes pride in producing a good piece of work ( he is an editor/writer) for the Party. He also takes note of the written and unwritten rules of the Party. As such, he knows that visiting Proletariat pubs are discouraged, even though there is no rule explicitly stated. He even goes as far as gain the support of a fellow rebel, Julia, and together they secretly defy the Party even more. These are some of the ways to overcome group pressure in the study of communications.

One of the most important topics of the book is groupthink. Well, the group is more like a party with millions of members but in essence it is still the same. The Party governing Oceania displays many of the symptoms of groupthink. For example, the Party members believe that The Party is indestructible and eternal. The thought of The Party's fall is inconceivable to many. They also believe that The Party is always right and that all Party propaganda is the truth. ( In fact, their Ministry of Truth is the exact opposite) Lastly, they clamp down hard on dissenters. The Thought Police constantly arrests dissenters who even THINK about disagreeing with The Party. The Ministry of Love is where those thought rebels are sent to. The Party is not lying when they say that "Big Brother is Watching You". There are other signs of groupthink but they are simply too numerous to list.

Many see Brave New World as a counterpart to 1984.

All in all, 1984 is a good book which challenges the mind, or at least my mind. If you are interested in books about dystopian societies, this is definately a must-have. You may also want to check out other books like Brave New World by Aldous Huxley.

Check this out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8

Apple made an advertisement for their Mac which was inspired by 1984.