Catfish

I personally enjoyed watching the documentary Catfish in class. It seemed to really capture a major problem with social networking and that is that people may not necessarily be who they say they are. The film starts out with a guy named Ariel Shulman and his friend Henry Joost who decide to film a documentary of Ariel’s younger brother Nev’s life relationship with an extremely young artist. It all began when Abby an eight- year old painter mailed Nev a painting of one of his photographs. (Nev was a dance photographer.)  Nev was blown away at how someone so young could paint so well.  Abby continued to mail Nev boxes of her work and he continued to be amazed. Before long Nev facebook friended Abby’s mother, Angela and a few other family members including Meghan, Abby’s gorgeous older half sister.

Through all kinds of modern technology the relationship between Nev and Abby’s family increased. Angela often spoke on the phone to Nev about how Abby had sold her paintings for large sums of  money, and how they were featured in an art studio. Meghan and Nev began communicating often through texting, phone call, and facebook and even began to have romantic feelings towards each other. Meaghan claimed to be an aspiring musician but when she sent Nev her songs he quickly grew suspicious. Turns out when he went on youtube he found the same song being song by the same voice…and it was NOT Meaghan. The documentary took an unexpected turn when Nev, Ariel and Henry drove all the way to Michigan to see what the real story was. What they discovered was that Angela, a middle-aged  women made the whole thing up! She was a painter and although she did have an eight-year-old daughter named Abby, Abby was not a painter. Meaghan was a real person but the photos of her were not real and the family had not seen her in years. Angela was living with a man named Vince and his two severely disabled sons’. She was depressed and created all of the character’s to simply attract Nev’s attention. Needless to say he was quite embarrassed that she was the one pretending to be Meaghan. Although Nev could have grown angry he simply felt sorry for the women and did not hold a grudge. She appeared to come clean about the situation by saying she had bone cancer, made up the character’s, Meaghan was actually in a rehab for alcohol abuse, the pictures of her were of a family friend and Abby was not a painter. Later it is learned that she did not have cancer, the pictures were not of a family friends and Meaghan was not in rehab.

Who Nev thought Meaghan was...

            This documentary really examines relationships based in modern communication. Film critique Don Simpson said, “It is all enough to give Marshall McLuhan a virtual post-mortem orgasm.”

(Click here to see Review) When Nev falls in love with Meaghan it is actually quite sad. He is not following in love with a real person, yet he thinks he knows enough about her through her online profile and phone conversations. I think it shows how we are too wired. Instead of going out and meeting someone and falling in love the old fashion way, Nev falls in love via the Internet. This did not work out in the end because the Meaghan whom Nev fell for was not real. It is scary to think that the person he had deep feelings for was actually an older, unattractive, crazy, women. That makes me hesitant to trust people’s online profiles.

            The Internet was used greatly in this film. Nev always seemed to be wired in. He and Meg shared facebook messages, videos, and chats. He even discovered the truth by using youtube another form of social networking where anyone can upload a video of literally anything that they want. He even used Google maps to find where the family supposedly lived. Overall I thought this was an excellent documentary that kept me on the edge of my seat and it truly did show how society as a whole is overly dependant on the internet.

Click here to watch the trailer of Catfish!

Exit Through the Gift Shop

   Throughout my life I have seen a lot of graffiti on various buildings, bridges etc. Who hasn’t? However by watching the documentary Exit Through the Gift Shop I was exposed to exactly what street art is and the meaning behind it. It is not just graffiti, it is a form of expression, of rebellion and it truly is art.

       This Documentary was originally supposed to be created by a French man named Theirry. He seemed to be mentally unstable as he carried a video camera literally EVERYWHERE he went. When Terry saw his younger brother starting to partake in creating street art the man became very interested with it. In fact, Terry’s interest went beyond normal and turned into an obsession. Before long Terry is traveling all over the world to meet and film famous street artists like Shepard Fairey who is well known for his OBEY propaganda. One of the most well known and secretive street artist out there, Banksy even allowed Thierry to help and film him. In return Thierry promised to make an amazing documentary using all of the film he collected.

       Throughout the film I learned that street art was more than just a prank. The artists who created this work poured their heart and soul into it. It was not about the money but about the message. Although some of Banky’s pieces were sold for over $500,000! It was clear that he was not after the money at all. Each artist thought up the idea and then had to create it! They made prints on large papers, make stickers and perhaps the trickiest part was they had to put the work up on  a building or some other public place without getting caught by the police! Street artists are rebels and I think the fact that it is illegal just adds to the overall excitement of the process. Most of the work is abstract, creative, in your face and sometimes rude. That is what street art is all about. It forces the public to take notice because it is right in front of them! It sends a message to the public, about the artist’s opinions and that is the whole point.

      After video taping for a ridiculously long time, the street artists began to wonder if Theirry would ever put together that documentary. The man had not even watched any of his footage. Theirry then decided to try and make his own street art. He hired a crew and created a humongous exhibit where he planned to show off his work. Banksy and Fairey even agreed to promote it on their websites. When the show went off it was literally GIANT! It featured a lot of Theirry (who went by the street artist name Mister Brainwash a.k.a. MBW). The public ate it up, they enjoyed his art creations.

     The problem with MBW work is that he is not a real street artist! Most street artists spend years creating work, finding there own unique style and working their way up from the bottom. Most don’t make any money at all for a long time, and as I said before money is NOT the focus. In Mister Brainwash’s case he started with a huge exhibit, that was quickly put together. He only copied the work of other’s he never found his own style and he sold his work for a lot of money. He went against the meaning of street art and completely missed the whole point of it. He may have created a lot of art that resembles other famous street art but there is no deeper meaning behind it.

      At the end of the film Banksy talked about how he was unhappy with the way that Mister Brainwash did things. That is the reason why he turned around the documentary that was supposed to be about him and made it about Theirry. Banksy was torn because he felt that Mister Brainwash broke the rules, but at the same time street art was not supposed to have any rules. I agree with Banksy, Theirry was a leech. He followed famous street artists around for years, he abandoned his family, he hired people to create his work (that was really just copying other’s styles) and he launched a huge exhibit before he proved himself like everyone else. Mister Brainwash is NOT a real street artist; he is a disgrace to street artists. Banksy stated at the end of the film, “That he will never again help anyone make a documentary about street art.” If I were Banksy, I would probably say the same thing.

      Despite Theirry’s sad attempt at  “art” I enjoyed watching this documentary and I learned a lot  about street art.  The next time I see street art on the side of a building or on a billboard, I will take the time to really look at it, admire the hardwork that went into creating it and even snap a picture before it is gone. I will never look at it the same way again and I have a lot of respect for the real street artist’s out there. If you want to see the documentary for yourself, it is all on youtube!  Watch Exit through the Gift Shop now!

Grade Posting

More Illustrator Art

Topher :)

Nike Logo recreated

Nike Logo for Adobe Illustrator

Great Seduction Question's

1.    1) How does Keen define Democratized media, and what are his main issues with this trend? Use examples from the web in the form of links.

The exact words Keen uses to explain democratized media are, “Media, information, knowledge, content, audience, author, - all were going to be democratized by Web 2.0. The internet would Democratize Big Experts, transforming them...” Basically Keen defines Democratized media as: The change in society that occurred through the use of Web 2.0. The creation of Web 2.0 revolutionized the way that people shared information. Thanks to sites such as Youtube, Google, blogs and Wikipedia for the first time amateur’s can publish whatever they want for anyone to read. According to Keen this eliminates experts because now anyone can be an expert. Keen has a problem with this because he feels amateurs are publishing incorrect information and therefore experts are necessary in society. Keen strongly believes that society is too heavily reliant on the Internet. He also thinks that the information put onto the Internet by amateurs is inaccurate but many people still believe it. The term, “I read it on the internet,” is becoming far too common. Not everything on the Internet is true but for some reason people believe that it is. To learn more about what Andrew Keen thinks visit his website: http://andrewkeen.typepad.com/home

2)    Compare and Contrast Keens take on Social Media with Douglas Rushkoff's. Which one speaks to you and your own experiences and why?

Both Keen and Rushkoff feel taken aback by the heavy use of Web 2.o in society.  The difference between the two is that although Douglas Rushkoff feels people are losing touch with themselves and relying to heavily on the internet and technology (always having to be “connected”) it seems to me that he still see’s certain positives in the use of this technology. On the other hand Keen seems to be totally against Web 2.0 and he seems to have absolutely no interest in trying to see the benefits that it can provide. I would relate more closely with Rushkoff because I too believe that most people are too connected with the Internet, but I certainly don’t think it is all bad. Lots of good comes from using the internet such as, sharing information quickly, communicating with family and friends via social networking sites, research is much easier to find (just check your sources!) and videos can be uploaded in seconds. I think that Keen is ignorant to ignore all the benefits of using Web 2.0. I also do not think the need for professionals is lost; most people trying to gather information search for articles from credible sites not just some random person’s blog. To learn more about what Douglas Rushkoff thinks visit: http://rushkoff.com/

Postings

I posted a response on Katie Messina's, Grace Sin's and Billy Hild's Blog.

Whither the Individual?

In today’s society social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Myspace are not only wildly popular but becoming a necessity to people of all ages. Youtube allows viewers to post and share videos where as the rise of blogs has been changing the way people express themselves. John Jantsh defines social media as, “The use of technology combined with social interaction to create or co create value.”  With all of these new forms of social media, many people fear that people are losing their own identity and conforming to the cookie cutter profiles these sites require.  I couldn’t disagree more.

With new technology comes more opportunities. The Internet world has grown rapidly in just the last few decades, back when my parents were growing up, the Internet did not even exist. Now lets think about that for a moment. Without the Internet there was no looking something up on Google or typing your papers. In order to do research a student would have to search through textbooks and then either hand write or write it on a typewriter. Think about all of the time wasted on searching for information. In today’s world we simply type into Google what we are looking for and more results than we know what to do with come up in a blink of an eye.

Now let’s consider social networking sites such as Facebook. Although there are some guidelines that must be followed, it in no way limits the way a person can express themselves. People can choose their friends, share photos, update their status, relationship status, and personal information. Facebook allows a person to share, as much or as little as they choose to, which I think is pretty cool. It is a way for people to keep up-to-date with what is going on in their friends lives.  It is defiantly a way that people can extend their self.

In the Social Media article it explained how back in the 1970s when someone watched a T.V. show they viewed as offensive it was more difficult to voice their opinion.  The viewer would be able to voice their opinion about the show with the people who were around them at the time but it would be challenging to go beyond that. The person could send a letter to the show, but that could take a long time to get a response, or more likely possibility, get not response. Thanks to social media today that same person could simply voice their opinion in a blog, or on a discussion board. This would allow others to respond and share their opinions and the information would be available for everyone to see. This is the publish than filter model that is different from in the more formal media such as the news and radio.

In the Digital Nation Video it examined how the rise of this new technology also created some problems. Children were now unable to focus their attention on something like reading a book, and could only learn through games. Other teenagers were experiencing an addiction to the Internet or computer games and College students found it nearly impossible to be disconnected at any moment. I believe that these problems are not as serious as the film has you believe. Too much of anything is bad. Of course it is not a good idea to expose children to computer, cell phones, and video games all day everyday! I believe that as long as parents monitor the use of these technologies the positive effects outweigh the negative. Young children should have serious restrictions to the amount of time they spend using technology so they will not form a dependence on it. I think schools should continue to teach using basics like reading books but honestly, if games help make learning fun why not include them in the curriculum? If the loss of personal space is what turns people away from technology, then that is just silly. The use of social media does not stop people from reflecting on their own. It is only an additional resource to use for collaboration.

It is confusing to the world about the effect technology is having, but that is just because it is new. A lot of people have a hard time adjusting to change, but change is a necessity to growth. I am sure many people were hesitant about automobiles replacing horse and carriages but think about how positively that change affected the world. With social media comes countless possibilities to extend ourselves more than we ever thought possible. So instead of running away from it, embrace it!

Questions

1. Today many TV shows and advertisements try to look amateurish or "homegrown" to emulate what is often seen on the Web. Do you think professional production values will continue to drop, or do you think amateur user-generated content will get better over time? WHY?? I think that user-generated content will improve over time. The reason for this is because technology is improving rapidly. Not too long ago most people did not even own computers and the Web is still fairly new. The more time that the web has been around the more advanced it will become.
   
2. What social media sites do you find yourself using the most, and why? In your opinion why is Facebook so much more successful than MySpace, and do you think Facebook is "here to stay" for the long term.
3. The Social Media site that I use the most is with out a doubt, Facebook. The reason I think that Facebook is more successful than Myspace is that Facebook is more of a way to communicate with a person's friends. People have to get permission to see your profile my "friending" you. Also It is a great way to keep in touch with people who you don't see everyday and know what is new with them. The way people can tag and share pictures, links, send messages, chat and  update statuses all in one site, makes Facebook appealing to all ages.
   
   before answering question #3 please read the Transparency in Social Media Blog Article
   
4. Why is transparency such an important concept in the Social Media world? Is it MORE or LESS important in the offline world? According to Wikipidia,  "Transparency… when used in a social context, implies openness, communication, and accountability." The reason that this is so important in the Social Media world is that when certain people accept money to endorse companies in their blog or twitter then viewers do not know whether what that person is saying is their true opinion or if it is what they are being paid to say. In real life most people tend to tell the truth and have transparency, they do this naturally without even thinking about it. Sometimes when people are on the web they do not tell the truth because they don't view being transparent on the web the same as off the web. This is a problem, people should be transparent both on and off the web.
   
   

McLuhan: The Medium is the Message Project - Cellphones

In this project I tried to show the impact cellphones have on our culture. Where as ten years ago few people owned cellphones, today, nearly everyone has one. People of all ages from young children to the elderly use this device regularly for its content of texting, talking, internet, sending pictures, etc. The effect on society that this rising use of cellphones created is huge (According to McLuhan, this is the message) For one thing, texting has changed the world. The rate of car accidents due to "distracted drivers" has increased significantly. Drivers are actually taking their eyes completely off the road to text while operating the veihical! Also in schools many students regularly text in class taking their focus away from the teacher. On the positive side, it has never been easier or faster, to get into contact with people. Friends, family and bussiness people can quickly and efficiently send information to each other without having to have a whole conversation or leave a message. Also, talking on cellphones is extremely convienient. If a person is away from home and they need to talk to someone, they no longer have to search for a payphone, they always have one on hand. Same with using the internet!

Ipad

Twitter

Blackberry