Friday, April 27, 2007

Fair and Balanced

Media coverage in our modern world has bias. It is nearly impossible to report the news without it. As consumers, we are given a choice. Who do we watch and why? I enjoy watching a myriad of different news sources for different reasons. Fox is my favorite for political commentary. NBC is my number one choice for domestic news. On international issues I often look to new sources outside of the United States such as the BBC. Recognizing who I trust and who I don't is important. CNN and CBS are not my favorite because I feel their perspective comes more from the left. That is all well and good if you are a viewer who expects that and aligns with that particular perspective. This is the freedom of choice. Watching news is not the only method in which to discover information. Reading is a actually a relaxing outlet for me to catch up on current events. Magazines and newspapers certainly have a similar bias to that of the major news conglomerates. For example, I would never read The New York Times because they lack credibility in my eyes due to their passionate pursuit of a political agenda. The Washington Post is more up my ally. In an ideal world, the news could always be trusted and the print we see in the paper could as well. However, this not being the case- it is the responsibility of the consumer to make well educated choices about what they tune in to and to hold the news conglomerates accountable. I feel that in this day and age where controversy abounds, no one can truly say that they are fair and balanced. It is a daunting challenge, but as consumers we must have the deft ability to sort through the coverage and find the facts ourselves. With this being such a time consuming task it is easy to see why so many Americans watch news for entertainment or become distracted by the superficial world of entertainment. This trend certainly needs to change and it is up to all of us to make that transition into a more media savvy realm.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Spin Doctors

Today everyone has their own agenda and objectives, including the news corporations and our nation's most powerful decision makers- politicians. Human nature directs each of us to act in our own self interest, however what happens when this course of action invades upon the greater good of our country and local communities? Is it possible to find common ground? I say YES.

We can agree that access to information is essential. We can agree that both national and international news deserve coverage. We can agree that as consumers we have the power to make decisions.

These decisions include changing the channel when a news station covers only fluff. Another alternative would be to listen to NPR or BBC. In terms of advertising, you don't need to buy products showcased from the sources you find conflict with. Unless powerful news and entertainment conglomerates are hit with a strong economic message they will not shift their content because popularity and ratings rake in increased revenue.

The class discussion was fascinating today and my favorite part was when Dave announced he wanted to be conspiracy mastermind because it would be fun. I agree! Spin doctors must make bank in this day and age...

Friday, April 6, 2007

The Woes of Working

Yesterday we discussed harassment and discrimination in the workplace in context to our individual free speech rights. Tension saturated the dialog due to the sensitive and complex nature of our topic. Whenever religion, sexual orientation and identity collide there is sure to exist deeply rooted emotions.

In the text, "Outspoken" a fireman wished to read Playboy at the firehouse in which he worked and spent the majority of his work and free time. A female employee there was offended and according to the new policy, Playboy was not to be permitted in the firehouse. This lead to a series of messy litigation and personal attacks. I agree with Dave that often a more human method of solving problems would be to work out differences in a private communication session led by a conflict resolution professional. Although to me Playboy is not offensive, historically sexism has existed in the firehouse for decades so the changing shape of the workforce may ruffle the feathers of those already accustomed to power. Our seminar discussion was thoughtful and colorful. Many perspectives were explored.

The case of the employee at HP posting biblical scripture was even more heated. I feel that the diversity campaign posters were perhaps not the best possible way to extend the agenda of multiculturalism in the work place, but that does not excuse the employee's motive to disturb his homosexual coworkers. Again, in a perfect world this conflict could have been solved through communication and thoughtful dialog but unfortunately messy litigation ensued and the fundamentalist Christian employee was fired after twenty one years of service. No one wins when people's feelings are hurt and yet in the corporate world the well being of employees has not been treated as a priority.

The Woes of Working

Yesterday we discussed harassment and discrimination in the workplace in the context to our individual free speech rights. Tension saturated the dialog due to the sensitive and complex nature of our topic. Whenever religion, sexual orientation and identity collide there is sure to exist deeply rooted emotions.

In the text, "Outspoken" a fireman wished to read Playboy at the firehouse in which he worked and spent the majority of his work and free time. A female employee there was offended and according to the new policy, Playboy was not to be permitted in the firehouse. This lead to a series of messy litigation and personal attacks. I agree with Dave that often a more human method of solving problems would be to work out differences in a private communication session led by a conflict resolution professional. Although to me Playboy is not offensive, historically sexism has existed in the firehouse for decades so the changing shape of the workforce may ruffle the feathers of those already accustomed to power. Our seminar discussion was thoughtful and colorful. Many perspectives were explored.

The case of the employee at HP posting biblical scripture was even more heated. I feel that the diversity campaign posters were perhaps not the best possible way to extend the agenda of multiculturalism in the work place, but that does not excuse the employee's motive to disturb his homosexual coworkers. Again, in a perfect world this conflict could have been solved through communication and thoughtful dialog but unfortunately messy litigation ensued and the fundamentalist Christian employee was fired after twenty one years of service. No one wins when people's feelings are hurt and yet in the corporate world the well being of employees has not been treated as a priority.

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Are we free where hate exists?

Our latest in class film revealed explosive tension within a Northern Montana community and truly made me question the nation in which we live. Here in California I feel sheltered to many of the racial and social tension experienced in other environments around the United States. One thought that stuck with me throughout the day connects our right as a citizen to the freedom of speech with a climate of fear and discrimination- are we free where hate exists?

The actions and choices of others are outside each of our personal control, however we do have the power to react independently. We can control our own behavior. This fact doesn't change with geography; however it is essential to acknowledge that we often lose the ability to choose the environment or community in which we live. Often people are deeply rooted to the community due to economic needs such as career stability or family ties. I find it problematic that there are people who feel unsafe inside their community but are unfortunately unable to escape. In such a circumstance, where the climate of fear and hate reign- is anyone truly free?

One Native American family choose to leave the community because of extreme racism in the classroom and local government. Although they each possessed the right to speak their mind, their freedom of speech did not solve their very real problems. The parents did not wish to raise their daughter in a town where hate speech was not only common but embedded within the town's very infrastructure. Many choose not to accept hate speech and stood up, spoke out and were quickly intimidated and threatened. This damaging cycle serves no reasonable purpose or objective. How then, can this community progress when the communication lacks ethical responsibility or accountability by its members. Change must be made and my last question remains...HOW?

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Beauty and the Beast

If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, how is it possible for art to be defined under one strict system of guidelines or principles? Beauty can be discovered under a vast myriad of unique perspectives. Art is controversial and will remain so as long as it exists in our world. If this line of thinking is true, then how do we step forward as a culture without becoming beasts of censorship?

One solution would be to separate the private and public sectors. If an art museum is privately owned it can show absolutely any piece its director or artist deems "art". Anything! When the museum is public and funded by tax payers, then accountability must exist. How that accountability would be regulated I dare not fathom, but it is indeed necessary.The people can decide what is art and what is not. If an individual or community feels uncomfortable about a showing of controversial pieces, then they are not obligated to attend the show or step one foot inside the museum. This way, the art can be showcased and viewed by those who are interested without intruding into the daily lives of those who wish not see it.

Protecting children from exploitation is also essential when exploring this issue. Children are not to be exploited under the name of "art". Using the lable of art as a protection is absolutely cowardly when it comes to photographing children in any nature (sexual or otherwise) with or without their consent. I believe this is a standard we must uphold and protect in any case.

Balancing artistic expression with the need for decency is certainly challenging and I look forward to learning how others view this sticky topic.

Wednesday, March 7, 2007

Sex and the City

Today our nation is immersed in a culture of pornography. After listening to our class discussion I have found my mind spinning into the potential social realms affected by this controversial issue and began considering popular culture and the beauty industry.

As a loyal viewer of the HBO series, "Sex and the City" I have come to realize the power of unleashing sexual taboos to a wide audience. I love the show because of the friendship, fashion and laughter; however the show itself is a sexual political statement. Although I am Pro Life and conservative on many issues I can still appreciate the humanity and controversy the show brings to life. Both heterosexual and homosexual relationships are portrayed while the empowered female protagonists discuss their professional careers, neurosis and hot topics. Three of the four main characters openly discuss their experience with abortion. Two of the characters experiment with bisexuality while all share the details of what goes on behind bedroom doors. Reaction to the show has been intense. While many appreciate the honesty and reality behind the program, others view the series as a threat to social values.

After six seasons the show has ended, but the debate behind sexuality is only just beginning. I believe freedom of expression is healthy and essential for community growth and human understanding. To build walls and close communication is dangerous and counter productive. Our nation has the opportunity to create progress if we only keep the conversation alive.

On a different note, the rise of porn culture has also created controversy in the realm of beauty. Many women feel that the blonde, big breasted, stick skinny stereotype of beauty is only further promoted within the porn industry. The "Dove Campaign for Real Beauty" has taken action with an overwhelming response from both the national media and consumers. Dove advertisements now feature real women of all shapes, sizes, ages and ethnicities in their print and television ads. This move was so controversial Oprah featured Dove on her popular program to discuss the power and potential of recognizing authentic beauty in our lives. I myself began buying Dove lotion and soaps because I appreciated their vision and wanted to support the idea that beauty surrounds us and does not fit simply into a single skin color or cup size.

To possess sexuality is healthy and natural. While I do not myself find pleasure from viewing porn I do not feel comfortable judging those who do. We are all responsible for our own choices in life and limiting sexual expression will not solve our social problems. Effectively communicating our ideas will make an immense impact and my hope is for all people to have the opportunity to engage in this thread of dialog.