Organ donation show was a joke
The kidney donor was an actress
Nowadays there are a lot of (maybe even too much) reality Tv shows. The more the audience of these shows increases the more the creativity of its producers expands. Families are swaping wives, young people are racing against each other to become the Paris Hilton!'s new “BFF”, terminally ill people are competing for a chance to live. Yes, the creativity of reality show producers knows no bounds.
In the Dutch Reality Tv Show called “De grote Donot – Show” a woman (Lisa) who suffers from brain tumor declared that she wants to donate her kidney. The Show was constructed just like the other Reality shows: Short films and interviews showed the lifes of the candidates who were hoping to be the one who gets the kidney. The candidates had to answer questions about their lifes and problem. The audience was encouraged to help Lisa by voting to decide which one of the candidates should get the kidney, in short which one of the candidates deserves to live.
The uncovery that the show was not real was made by the moderator just at the moment when Lisa had to say who is going to get the kidney. Lisa had no brain tumor and there was no kidney to be donated but the three candidates were real patients waiting for organ donations.
The fake organ donation Tv show divided the audience into two groups: On the one hand people were supporting the show which made a fool of millions of television viewers on the other hand there were some arguing that there should immediately be set some limits regarding the reality show industry. “We won't give a kidney in this show, this goes too far, even for us” said the moderator of the show. According to Ronald Plasterk the show was an intelligent way to direct the audience's attention to the failing of organ donation in the Netherlands.
I think it is a good example to show everybody that the reality show industry has to be somehow limited.
3 Ocak 2010 Pazar
6. Germany's "Truman Show"
Germany builds its own "Truman Show City": The Big Brother Town
Germnany's version of the Big Brother reality Tv show plans to build a small town for its candidates. There the contestants will remain for decades, live their daily routine, start families and grow old - always under observation, of course.
This new reality concept brings the film “The Truman Show” to mind. In the movie, a man called Truman is unconsciously the subject of a 24 – hour TV programme that shows his every living moment to a wolrdwide audience.
In the Big Brother city, beig built outside Hamburg, the only difference will be that the candidates will be willing participants.
In the city, there will be a forest, a town square complete with shops and a church tower, schools and businesses. Contestants will, it is hoped, live there for years; falling in love, going to school, even getting married.
Producer Rainert Laux said: "We hope couples will get pregnant and family groups will interact with all the usual family frictions."
Mainly unemployed persons are prefered as candidates for the new reality show. Nonworkers will have the opportunity to catch up high school, learn languages or any other type of professional examination for a career and find a job.
Media psychologist Jo Graibel voiced concerns that people who stayed in the fake community for any length of time would find it hard to adjust to the "real world" beyond. She says: “no candidate can judge what it means to live in a world of fiction for many many years. There would be always a danger, to never be able to adapt oneself to the real world.”
Big Brother producer rejects all critcisms: Each candidate knows what awaits him.
Contestants will live in the city for years and it will be as realistic as possible so they have no problems reintegrating into society. But the company was unable to provide details on financing for such an ambitious scheme.
Broadcaster RTL2's idea of the Big Brother town is similar to the world of Truman. Its Big Brother city, built from scratch along the lines of a theme park, will afford fans of the show visits to the community to see the residents just as if they were visiting a zoo.
Germnany's version of the Big Brother reality Tv show plans to build a small town for its candidates. There the contestants will remain for decades, live their daily routine, start families and grow old - always under observation, of course.
This new reality concept brings the film “The Truman Show” to mind. In the movie, a man called Truman is unconsciously the subject of a 24 – hour TV programme that shows his every living moment to a wolrdwide audience.
In the Big Brother city, beig built outside Hamburg, the only difference will be that the candidates will be willing participants.
In the city, there will be a forest, a town square complete with shops and a church tower, schools and businesses. Contestants will, it is hoped, live there for years; falling in love, going to school, even getting married.
Producer Rainert Laux said: "We hope couples will get pregnant and family groups will interact with all the usual family frictions."
Mainly unemployed persons are prefered as candidates for the new reality show. Nonworkers will have the opportunity to catch up high school, learn languages or any other type of professional examination for a career and find a job.
Media psychologist Jo Graibel voiced concerns that people who stayed in the fake community for any length of time would find it hard to adjust to the "real world" beyond. She says: “no candidate can judge what it means to live in a world of fiction for many many years. There would be always a danger, to never be able to adapt oneself to the real world.”
Big Brother producer rejects all critcisms: Each candidate knows what awaits him.
Contestants will live in the city for years and it will be as realistic as possible so they have no problems reintegrating into society. But the company was unable to provide details on financing for such an ambitious scheme.
Broadcaster RTL2's idea of the Big Brother town is similar to the world of Truman. Its Big Brother city, built from scratch along the lines of a theme park, will afford fans of the show visits to the community to see the residents just as if they were visiting a zoo.
5. Violence Among Boys
Ways of Reducing Aggression
According to Katz not only video games and tv programs lead to aggression among boys but also sports. Katz claims that there are sports containing violence which contributes to aggression among men. I do not fully agree with Katz. I think taking exercies help teenagers to deal with their aggression. “A lot of teenagers do not know what to do with their energy. If they cant get rid of their energy, it will very likely lead to violence” (Kröger). According to Kröger, we have to provide leisure activities so that they can get rid of their energy. One way of discharging energy is through sport. Exercises strenghtens teenager's sens of self confidence and teaches them to deal with their energy in a more controlled way.
According to Katz not only video games and tv programs lead to aggression among boys but also sports. Katz claims that there are sports containing violence which contributes to aggression among men. I do not fully agree with Katz. I think taking exercies help teenagers to deal with their aggression. “A lot of teenagers do not know what to do with their energy. If they cant get rid of their energy, it will very likely lead to violence” (Kröger). According to Kröger, we have to provide leisure activities so that they can get rid of their energy. One way of discharging energy is through sport. Exercises strenghtens teenager's sens of self confidence and teaches them to deal with their energy in a more controlled way.
4. Advertisement's Image of Women 2
Calvin Klein is another worldwide known label who has to deal with a lot of criticisms. Until now two Calvin Klein ads have been forbidden. Just like Dolce & Gabbana Calvin Klein often picks the gender role out as a central theme in its ads. In this example we see that the woman kneels, again the man is portrayed superior. The woman seems to be depended on the man as she is huging him. The man, on the other hand is presented powerful, serious, strong and independent.
As I was looking for ads demonstrating powerful, independent, selfconfident women, I found two interesting advertisements (1. http://www.reklamlar.tv/rtv/sin/one/N/P_P/rv/BHDGR 2. http://www.reklamlar.tv/rtv/sin/one/N/P_P/rv/BHDTD): The ads show a woman jumping over roofs, facing dangerous situations, fighting with variousenemies to reach her boyfriend. The woman is presented as powerful, brave, beautiful, independent, fearless, though, in short just like a man. Looking at her clothes, her knife, her behaviour one recognizes that it is not womanlike. She is not acting like a woman. She fights like a man with a knife. This example shows us clearly that strength, superiority, power is linked with manhood. To show a woman powerful the advertisement industry uses elemnts from the world of manhood.
To sell poducts the advertisement industry does not only use women of course. Colours play a really important role: Beside its eye catching function it also sends out some messages. For instance this absolute vodka advertisement has a very colourful background. Every colour used has a differet meaning. Yellow expresses vitality, warmth, wealth, green represents freshness, youth, blue stands for dreams, calmness, red means activity, love, danger and passion.
3. Advertising's Image of Women
Protests: "Dolce & Gabbana Ad suggests gang rape!"
In advertisements women are mostly presented either as the capable, efficient, “ready to work” housewife who knows how to use domestic appliences, who is informed about the best cleaning powder etc. or as the young, beautiful, attractive woman, desired by numerous men. The second one, of course, is more preferable in the advertising industry because “sex sells”.
The primary purpose of the media is to sell products and advertising sells products but it also sells a great deal more than products: values, images, conepts of love and sexuality, romance, success etc.
Beautiful women are used to make the female audience try as hard as possible to look like those attractive women in the ads (which can be possible only if they buy the right products) but they also serve as objects, which encourage men to purchase the promoted product.
As above mentioned ads sell values, images and concepts. Subjects like the image of women in society, the concept of gender roles, etc are often debated on. Now one question arises: How does the advertisement industry deals with these issues?
An advertisement of the worldwide known label Dolce & Gabbana has given cause for serious criticisms and protests in Italy.
It shows a half naked man holding a woman who is lying on the floor. At the background four other men are presented, all of them looking directly at the woman on the ground. The ad was perceived as pornographic and misogynistric. Both of the famous fashion designers had to deal with serious accusations: “the add is an instigation, a provocation of gang rape” (Italian newspaper).
Eventhoug this example is a bit exaggerated it shows us that sexism, sexual harassment and the culturally portrayal of woman are inextricablly linked.
The Dolce & Gabbana woman lays on the ground: she is in a passive position. The men, in contrast, are all staying. This is pointing out their actif status.The fact that the woman is lying automatically makes the men look superior. They are all above her; they are all looking down at her.
This passiveness reduces her to the status of an object. That she is neither moving nor resisting contributes to the display as an object.
The men obviously outnumber the woman, which shows the dominance of men. The men are presented powerful, strong, tough in contrast to the powerless woman.
According to Jean Kilbourne turning women's bodies into objects has serious consequences: Turning an human being into an object is the first step of violence. The thought that women are less than human leads to violence against women.
So it is not surprising that the Dolce&Gabbana ad has caused this much protest.
2. Fake Photos: Tourist of Death
I have found an intersting photo while looking for information for my essay (how ethical is it for journalists to produce images of human suffering?).
http://www.russellheimlich.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/touristofdeath.jpg
This photo, titled UHOH.JPG or MISSING(1).JPG, shows a tourist posing on the roof of the World Trade Center a split second before the first plane crashed.
It first appeared a few days after 9/11. In addition to the photo a text message was released on the net: the message said "This is just an astonishing picture..this was from a camera found in the wreckage of the WTC, developed by the FBI for evidence and released on the net today....the guy still has no name and is missing..."
The photo sparked sesations of horror in those who viewed it in the days immediately following the terrorist attacks on the United States. Many people believed it to be real, everyone thought the picture was found on a camera in the ruins of the WTC.
However after much speculation, the photo has been analysed and a number of logistical errors showed that it was an edited picture, or a hoax.
Firstly, September 11 was a warm and sunny late summer day, not the type of weather in which a tourist would have been decked out in a winter coat and hat.
Secondly, The airliner shown in the picture is approaching from the north and would therefore have been the plane that hit the north tower of the World Trade Center (WTC1), but WTC1 did not have an outdoor observation deck.
Thirdly, While the sun is shining from the guy's left, producing harsh shadows on the right side of his face, the plane is evenly lighted from above.
Why people are making fake images like these?
As time passed, more became known of the origins of this photo. A Hungarian tourist who had visited New York in November, 1997 was responsible for this hoax - being both the subject and the instigator. He'd sent the alteration to friends as a 'joke' after the events of 9/11...
http://www.russellheimlich.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/touristofdeath.jpg
This photo, titled UHOH.JPG or MISSING(1).JPG, shows a tourist posing on the roof of the World Trade Center a split second before the first plane crashed.
It first appeared a few days after 9/11. In addition to the photo a text message was released on the net: the message said "This is just an astonishing picture..this was from a camera found in the wreckage of the WTC, developed by the FBI for evidence and released on the net today....the guy still has no name and is missing..."
The photo sparked sesations of horror in those who viewed it in the days immediately following the terrorist attacks on the United States. Many people believed it to be real, everyone thought the picture was found on a camera in the ruins of the WTC.
However after much speculation, the photo has been analysed and a number of logistical errors showed that it was an edited picture, or a hoax.
Firstly, September 11 was a warm and sunny late summer day, not the type of weather in which a tourist would have been decked out in a winter coat and hat.
Secondly, The airliner shown in the picture is approaching from the north and would therefore have been the plane that hit the north tower of the World Trade Center (WTC1), but WTC1 did not have an outdoor observation deck.
Thirdly, While the sun is shining from the guy's left, producing harsh shadows on the right side of his face, the plane is evenly lighted from above.
Why people are making fake images like these?
As time passed, more became known of the origins of this photo. A Hungarian tourist who had visited New York in November, 1997 was responsible for this hoax - being both the subject and the instigator. He'd sent the alteration to friends as a 'joke' after the events of 9/11...
1. Tv Reality Shows: Selling Dreams, Not Talent
I have found an interesting article about Reality TV. I think it's a great article because it covers all what should be written or commented on reality shows.
TV reality shows: Selling dreams, not talent
By: Saloua Charfi
Is it possible for a show that relies on fiction despite claiming being based on reality, and which seeks quick gains through excitement, to produce creativity?
To answer this question, we should look at the industry of reality TV shows, and at the cultural and economic background of the production of these programs, in order to determine the extent to which the conditions of creativity are satisfied.
Firstly, these programs rely on non-specialists to judge competence and talent in a field that needs specific knowledge in terms of voice, music and performance. The most serious aspect of those programs is the contained values more than the spoken ones.
Reality TV shows are based on three false ideas stipulating that a) anyone can become a star in a short period of time and over a course that is different than the course of a traditional artist, b) the viewer is the main and free judge, and finally c) what the program shows is reality itself.
In reality, voting is based on the fanaticism of the young people of each country for their compatriot participating in the program, and on what the program allowed them to watch through the cameras that focus for hours on the details of the daily life of a group of people.
Where is creativity in stalking people all day long? Is that considered a criterion for a fair judgment of artistic talents that are disrupted by pale details?
The program attracts people by deluding them that what it broadcasts is reality, while the scenarios of reality TV shows are defined before shooting, and even during the selection of candidates that will participate in the competition, especially girls; ordinary people have no chance in them. After all, this program is merely like other fictional drama programs; it’s just a show in the “show community”, as the participants look like puppets with controlled movements that do not reflect any personality. The clothes and hair styles of the participants may impress more than their artistic performance.
The French writer Philippe Moret says: “Television creates reality now, its own reality, not the real reality. People have become similar to what they see on their monitors, they are no longer real people”.
In search for an explanation for the race to "reality TV " shows, we face the reality of their feverish seeking of quick profit through selling dreams and excitement, and not their concern to discover artistic talents. These programs are one of the biggest attractions for spectators, as well as advertisers, since these shows depend on the funding of some sponsors in exchange for displaying ads and having the participants promote their products, such as clothing, perfumes or cosmetics. In addition to that, phone calls have become a gold mine for telecom operators and television, besides the income of sub-products such as tapes and films.
This explains why the TV channels which broadcast this kind of programs are private investments, and not governmental channels.
Therefore, these programs are interested in quick profits through excitement, more than being interested in talent.
I think not only the article but also the comments on it are really interesting.
Here is an example, someone wrote:
How can the public – with all due respect to them – be the judge in a field that requires years of in depth studies? Is it conceivable for example that anyone can be the judge in medicine or engineering? So why is there contempt in music?
I totally agree with this person because I also think that for beeing able to judge one needs to have a certain background or knowledge about, in this case, the music area. So why people, mainly teenagers, taking this Reality Show issue so serious?
TV reality shows: Selling dreams, not talent
By: Saloua Charfi
Is it possible for a show that relies on fiction despite claiming being based on reality, and which seeks quick gains through excitement, to produce creativity?
To answer this question, we should look at the industry of reality TV shows, and at the cultural and economic background of the production of these programs, in order to determine the extent to which the conditions of creativity are satisfied.
Firstly, these programs rely on non-specialists to judge competence and talent in a field that needs specific knowledge in terms of voice, music and performance. The most serious aspect of those programs is the contained values more than the spoken ones.
Reality TV shows are based on three false ideas stipulating that a) anyone can become a star in a short period of time and over a course that is different than the course of a traditional artist, b) the viewer is the main and free judge, and finally c) what the program shows is reality itself.
In reality, voting is based on the fanaticism of the young people of each country for their compatriot participating in the program, and on what the program allowed them to watch through the cameras that focus for hours on the details of the daily life of a group of people.
Where is creativity in stalking people all day long? Is that considered a criterion for a fair judgment of artistic talents that are disrupted by pale details?
The program attracts people by deluding them that what it broadcasts is reality, while the scenarios of reality TV shows are defined before shooting, and even during the selection of candidates that will participate in the competition, especially girls; ordinary people have no chance in them. After all, this program is merely like other fictional drama programs; it’s just a show in the “show community”, as the participants look like puppets with controlled movements that do not reflect any personality. The clothes and hair styles of the participants may impress more than their artistic performance.
The French writer Philippe Moret says: “Television creates reality now, its own reality, not the real reality. People have become similar to what they see on their monitors, they are no longer real people”.
In search for an explanation for the race to "reality TV " shows, we face the reality of their feverish seeking of quick profit through selling dreams and excitement, and not their concern to discover artistic talents. These programs are one of the biggest attractions for spectators, as well as advertisers, since these shows depend on the funding of some sponsors in exchange for displaying ads and having the participants promote their products, such as clothing, perfumes or cosmetics. In addition to that, phone calls have become a gold mine for telecom operators and television, besides the income of sub-products such as tapes and films.
This explains why the TV channels which broadcast this kind of programs are private investments, and not governmental channels.
Therefore, these programs are interested in quick profits through excitement, more than being interested in talent.
I think not only the article but also the comments on it are really interesting.
Here is an example, someone wrote:
How can the public – with all due respect to them – be the judge in a field that requires years of in depth studies? Is it conceivable for example that anyone can be the judge in medicine or engineering? So why is there contempt in music?
I totally agree with this person because I also think that for beeing able to judge one needs to have a certain background or knowledge about, in this case, the music area. So why people, mainly teenagers, taking this Reality Show issue so serious?
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)