Section Tew by David Gonzalez

SECTION TWO

CONSUMERISM CONSUMPTION INTRODUCTION Lor min cum ent. Tibus coribus derit re, que nestios sitiaest qui officimos venimilibus vendam dolut que commolupti tem il incto quam, conectior rerio expliquia doloreh eniatenem eos di corem esernatem. Ugitae volupta tPitaeperum quatur rerovit id ut venda dolorro vitions ectium consed quo quate peliquam inimusa peraturibus aut ut aliquis inti cullabo. Ulparupid quis aut voloris andandem lanti ium res sant. Et dem faciis re perepe que sectasimus adis as et odis aut ad mo tem dolor senimpo riaestor acerchi ciminum faceruntemo estiuribus aut qui ipis aut quidion ped quosam id quatect iossit quis est eume evellore lab in nostias aboribus dolor reheni velignim

AND VIOLENCE FOR ALL Ovit re nam, alit offic tenis il is eribusam solorro voluptas magnam volute de volo experiantia.

WILD SALMON

SECTION TWO

Fresh caught wild salmon at a local market in Seattle. Photo by Elizabeth Bonert.

CHAPTER

THE â&#x20AC;&#x153;ENDLESSâ&#x20AC;? RESOURCE America and the Ocean

The United States is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, which means we have the ability to provide an abundance of food for our people. We also have high expectations for what is available to us. We want things now, and fast. No time to waste. When we go to the supermarket greedily we expect to find exactly what we want. From the restaurant table to a paper bag handed through a drive through window, you can feed your desire for fish anytime. Seafood has become an intricate part of the American menu. Science has shown us that fish is a healthy part of a stable diet. Omega-3 and fish oil have been shown to reduce blood clots, prevent prostate cancer, reduce inflammation and even depression. With the number of people adding seafood to their diet, the demand for fish has also increased. Of course we all know that fish come from water, whether fresh such as tuna, swordfish, and grouper are wild-caught. Others species like catfish, tilapia, and salmon are mostly farmed. Wild caught and farmed fish have their pros and cons. But with the

SECTION TWO

or salt, but where does the fish actually come from? Some species

current health of the ocean, the negatives out weigh the positives.

While the ocean is one of the largest resources that our planet has to offer, we are depleting its bounty faster than anything on land. Although the ocean is very resilient, it is also extremely fragile. It’s a balancing act of the species both relying on the other to remain healthy. But we have interfered with this check and balance system, and we are starting to see the consequences of our actions.

THE ISSUE AT HAND So what’s the problem? So what that Americans have a taste for fish, it’s good for you right? Those salmon fillets and seared tuna dishes are a hard thing to give up. Well, it may be a delicacy on your menu that you’ll havevvv to part with. Overfishing is a global problem. Luckily here in the United States we have established laws and standards for the fishing industry in our waters, but that’s just a small piece of the vast ocean. U.S. fishing fleets have a study from 2005 showing those fishermen were discarding about onefifth of their catch. The fishing methods trawling and purse seine, are most commonly used and both can result in a large amount of by-catch. Juvenile fish, marine animals, and other species of fish get caught in these nets as well as the targeted species. These undesired animals are known as by-catch. Unfortunately most of these animals fall victim to the nets by suffocation or drowning and therefore cannot be saved. They are simply just discarded back into the ocean. So not only are we exploiting the resource of wild fish to catch, we are also poisoning it. You read right, we are making the food we eat toxic. Industrial pollution has caused mercury to end up in our SECTION TWO

waterways and oceans. This mercury ends up being absorbed by the fish putting the toxins right into the meat that we eat. Exposure to mercury in the human body is a very serious issue. It can attack your nervous system; immune system, cause heart attacks,

6 BYCATCH Loggerhead sea turtle caught in a net. Re-appropriated image by Elizabeth Bonert.

SECTION TWO

cardiovascular disease, and the list can go on. Fetuses and young

children exposed to it can cause them to have blindness, deafness, or cerebral palsy. Ok so if wild fish stocks are depleted and their meat is becoming toxic, then farmed fish must be the solution right? Not quite... You hear about poor living conditions of the animals in the poultry, pork, and beef industry, the fish farming industry is no different. Salmon farming is one of the worst offenders. The fish are kept in pens that only give them a small amount of space to swim, and for a fish that instinctually swims great distances this is an extremely stressful environment. With such tight quarters, disease and sickness are common. Rather than lessen the population in the tanks, they are fed antibiotics in attempts to counteract the inevitable. The food that the fish are fed is usually made from crops and ground up fish. So, not only can the ground up fish contain mercury and other toxins, the crops are usually contaminated with pesticides, herbicides, and GMOs. With their diet not being as adequate as it would be in the wild the meat ends up having a lower level of protein and the omega 3â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s have more fat. The farming itself is also harmful to the environment around the area. Disease and waste from the fish can end up flowing out into the surrounding ecosystem. Even escaped diseased fish can threaten the wild populations of salmon.

CHANGES BEING MADE While the industry is in need of re-evaluating their farming techniques, positive changes are still being made. Today the technology that makes this industrial fishing so easy can also be SECTION TWO

used for other purposes. By doing research we are learning more about the different species of fish that we like to eat, and therefore how to help protect them. Marine Protected Areas that have been set up all over the world are proving to be very beneficial

to different populations of fish. In the United States alone there

are around 1,600 MPAs combined in fresh and saltwater. These sanctuaries allow fish to recuperate from the pressures of fishing. By having a safe place to live and breed without threat of being taken or their habitat destroyed. A perfect example here in the state of Florida is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. This 3,708 square mile sanctuary is protected year round as a no take zone with commercial and recreational fishing restricted. This means that nothing can be taken off the reefs, dead or alive. It became a national sanctuary in 1990 to protect its thriving tourism and fishing industry. A lot of fishing methods are not only destructive to the fish’s population but their habitat as well. Nets and bottom trawling destroy reefs, entangle undesired species, kills juvenile fish, and creates by-catch. But there are some methods of fishing that are being practiced that are substantially more sustainable. The method of rod and reel fishing requires actually having to catch the fish and seeing what ends up on the line. This eliminates the problem of by-catch because if an untargeted species or juvenile fish is caught it can be released, allowed to live another day. National Geographic Channel recently came out with a television show that features the sustainable side of the tuna fishing industry. The show ‘ Wicked Tuna ‘ showcases the rod and reel method. While the fishing boat crews on the different boats are entertaining they also give the shows viewers a look inside of the fishing industry and the problems that are happening with it. By raising awareness to the problem they are helping to create change within the industry. With so many issues that accompany conventional aquaculture a possible solution has come about: recirculating aquaculture systems. What makes MPAs a better answer than normal other bodies of water. This protects wild fish populations from disease, pollution, and escaped fish. These facilities can be placed

SECTION TWO

aquaculture is that they are based inland rather than in ponds or

anywhere so they could be built closer to wherever the fish will

end up being sold. The environment of the facility is controlled and with the water being recirculated this helps to prevent the amount of waste buildup in the tanks and reduce the risk of disease. This method enables fish farmers to raise different types of fish all at the same time in the same place and the ability to harvest certain fish at the most profitable time. Although there is a high cost in the construction of these facilities, the economic outcome of this operation pays off. Sustainable Catch Signage informing customers at a local market in Seattle that the seafood was caught sustainably. Photo by Elizabeth Bonert

THE PURSUIT OF SUSTAINABILITY Now it is time to play your part. You now have some knowledge of where your food comes from, and understanding of why it is important to know. A change in the industry needs to happen for not only the oceans health, but for our own. This is America, we shouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have to be worried if the food we eat will poison us. SECTION TWO

If you want to continue to enjoy your seared ahi tuna, swordfish sandwich, and salmon fillet then you need to take action now. Here are just a few things you can do.

1. KEEP IT LOCAL

When purchasing seafood to cook at home try to purchase from a local market. Smaller fishing operations tend to be more sustainable and the catch is based on what fish are in season. Do a little research and you may be surprised of what local seafood is available near you. Your food doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t need as many miles on it as your car. 2. KNOW WHERE IT COMES FROM When going out to eat ask your waiter where the fish came from. Make sure they can verify that the fish were caught or farmed in a sustainable way. The more people that show concerns about where there food comes from, the more likely a change will occur within the industry itself. 3. CHANGE IT UP Take a look at a seafood chart to see what are the most sustainable and least toxic choices of fish to eat. Start replacing the red-listed fish like tuna and salmon with fish that are on the green-list. 4. BEACH CLEANUP Get involved with local beach or reef clean ups. Helping pick up trash not only makes the environment look better, but also makes it healthier. A healthier marine environment will, in turn, improve the health of the fish that we eat. 5. STAY INFORMED Keep up to date with news and events in marine conservation and the fishing industry. By keeping up with what is going on you can help make changes in the politics part of the industry. You have been given knowledge. Now it is time to make changes to ensure that the seafood industry will thrive for generations to come. SECTION TWO

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

OUT OF THE GROUND A Heathy Part of Your Diet

Everybody knows that a healthy diet includes a significant amount of fruit and veggies. The old food pyramid suggested that in a 2,000-calorie diet a person should eat three to five servings of vegetables and two to four servings of fruit everyday. Over the past several years there has been debates about this food pyramid and it has been changed numerous times. Nowadays the idea of “servings” has been replaced with how many cups you should you eat per day. That translates to that a person with a 2,000-calorie diet should eat two cups of fruit and two and a half cups of vegetables. Fruits and vegetables are good for you, but why? They provide for a long list of health benefits. Reducing the risk of heart disease, heart attacks, strokes, obesity, type 2 diabetes, kidney stones, some cancers, and can lower blood pressure, and reduce the risk of bone loss. And that’s just the beginning. Compared to other types for the most part they are fat free. They provide essential vitamins and minerals that your body needs as well. Vegetables provide potassium, which helps with having a healthy blood pressure,

SECTION TWO

of food you may snack on, they are low in calories, sodium, and

dietary fibers that can reduce blood cholesterol and the risk of

heart disease, folate which is beneficial to red blood cells, vitamin A that keeps your eyes and skin healthy, and vitamin C which aids in healing wounds and keeps your gums and teeth in good condition. So it sounds like fruit and vegetables are a flawless food. They can do wonders for your body in so many different ways. How could something that does so much good for your health do any harm? It’s natural and grows out of the ground, which has to mean it’s a clean and completely healthy food item, right? Well, that is true but of course because we need to grow enough food to feed ourselves as well as the animals we feed on, the agriculture industry has been industrialized. This means large scale and needs to produce a high yield of product. Anything that can harm this product needs to be prevented and destroyed, no matter what the cost is…

THE ISSUE AT HAND With so many mouths to feed the agriculture industry became industrialized after World War II. The main purpose of the industry is to create as much product as possible, but this is an unsustainable thought process and method. This is no mom and pop farm, it is a produce factory, and there is an input and an output. Plants need there to be nutrients in the soil they are growing in. This method of large scale farming over exhausts the soil, leading it to become useless. Large of amounts of freshwater are needed to make the plants grow. This amount of freshwater could be used for human consumption and a large portion of it ends up running into nearby streams and rivers, polluting them with fertilizers and pesticides. Agriculture also is the source of 1/3 of the world’s SECTION TWO

global greenhouse gas emissions, which cause global warming and climate change. The biodiversity of species is also at risk from agriculture. The pesticides used to kill off bugs and pests are killing animals such as bees, bats, and amphibians. These animals play a

crucial role in their environments and humans could suffer from

these animals disappearing forever. The industry is not only harmful to the environment but to our own health. The plants we are growing and harvesting are chemically protected. Any problem that arises is not fixed with knowledge of farming. Instead some form of chemical is used for the fix. Keeping away pests, diseases, and weeds are these chemicals purpose. The fruit and vegetables absorb the chemicals used leaving a toxic residue for us to eat. Here are some examples of food that we eat and the rating of residues they have, note: 1 is the lowest and 100 is the highest amount. Peaches: 100 Apples: 89 Bell Peppers: 86 Celery: 85 Strawberries: 82 Cherries: 75 Pears: 65 Spinach: 60 Lettuce: 59 Potatoes: 58 So what do all of these chemical resides mean for us? The FDA and USDA do monitor how much pesticides are used on farms, but the government says that a little bit of chemicals on your produce won’t kill you. But studies have been conducted and science always wins in the end. Some studies are finding a correlation between pesticides and cancer, attention-deficit disorder, nervous system disorders, and weakened immune systems. Of course these are all horrible for us adults but they pose an even greater threat to the SECTION TWO

developing brains of children.

15 Organic Produce Fresh organic produce at a local market in Seattle Photo by Elizabeth Bonert

CHANGES BEING MADE So what is being done with this industrial agriculture? If the science is there to back up that this is in fact a problem for people and the future of our food some changes should be in the works. Luckily they are. The trend of organic food has caught on. Produce labeled organic means that is has been grown without using pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, or genetically modified organisms. The USDA has an organic seal of approval for products certifiably organic. There are three categories: 100% Organic, Organic, and Made with Organic Ingredients. By labeling the products it is easier for the consumer to be assured that they are in fact purchasing organic food. With more and more people becoming aware of what goes on in the current industrial agriculture industry more are switching to organic. If the market favors organic more, the industry is bound to change.

THE PURSUIT OF CLEAN SECTION TWO

So what can you do to help change the crop industry? How can you protect yourself against these harmful chemical residues? Here are just a few things that you can start with:

1. GROW YOUR OWN

If you have the space to whether in a yard, community garden, or rooftops try to grow your own produce. This enables you to control what goes on with your plants so you are the one who knows what your food is made of. There are plenty of home gardening resources out there to help you along the way and to inform you of when is the best time to grow what. 2. GO TO A LOCAL MARKET Most local farmers are starting to grow their crops organically. Find a local farmers market near you to buy your produce from. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a great feeling to know where your food is actually coming from. Another plus to buying local is that the food is fresher and will stay fresher longer than store bought fruits and vegetables. 3. BUY ORGANIC WHENEVER POSSIBLE When you do buy your produce at a grocery store buy organic, especially the types of fruit and veggies mentioned before with high chemical residue levels. Luckily organic food has really caught on commercially so there should be a large selection. Publix for example has sections in their produce department dedicated to organic foods. 4. KNOW YOUR STUFF Do some research of your own. Look into the list of chemicals that are used and what their effects are. Also look into how many chemicals are being used on your favorite foods. By knowing more about the food you are eating the better you can protect yourself against the side affects that can come with their consumption. 5. STAY INFORMED Keep up to date with news and events talking about the industrial agriculture industry. By keeping up with what is going on you can been given knowledge. Now it is time to make changes to ensure that the agriculture industry creates healthy chemical free food for future generations and us.

SECTION TWO

help make changes in the politics part of the industry. You have

CHAPTER

AS SEEN ON TV: MEDIA AS EDUCATION Media “teaches” kids about life before they can experience it or learn from their guardians.

The endless exposure to media for kids will lead to a generation of brainwashed idiots with no innocence. Many kids today know how to use an iPad before they can write; parents take a backseat on teaching children about life, simply because they can read about it online or in print. The quality of information that children receive is tainted; much of it is not aimed for their eyes but is received by them anyways. Young people grow up with a narrow view of the world based on what they read in magazines and see on TV or movies without realizing that the reality they see on TV is fictitious. “Ads sell more than products. They sell values, they sell images, they sell concepts of love and sexuality, of success, and perhaps most important, of normalcy. To a great extent they tell us who we are and who we should be. ” –Jean Kilbourne.

in the media. It is the first experience children have to things like kissing, sex, relationships, parties, and drugs. It gives them a distorted view of reality, and a skewed understanding of these

SECTION TWO

Children construct their view of reality based on what they see

things is hard to replace. The norm for them will be what is

popular in the media, which encompasses things like sex and other explicit activities. The message sent to young people is that in order to fit in, you must behave similar to fictional characters. This is a dangerous idea, because emulation of things seen in the media encourages kids to get into drugs, violence, and sex at progressively younger ages without understanding the consequences. Audiences are not interested in anything PG rated. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Normalâ&#x20AC;? life is mundane and boring to depict, and shows that seem to portray normal life are, in reality, pure fabrications of the media. Some things taught in media are seemingly innocent, but leave a strong moral lesson. One example is the Disney princess complex. Young girls grow up on romantic fairytale movies that give false expectations to relationships. Girls assume that Prince Charming will come sweep them off their feet while they sit around looking pretty. The movie Beauty and the Beast exemplifies how fairytales teach kids this love scenario and how this and what is known as the Stockholm syndrome, a condition where kidnapped victims or hostages may develop feelings of trust or affection toward their captor, are both seen as OK. The main character is tricked into seeking out the Beastsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; castle when he imprisons her father. She offers herself over to replace her, and after spending some time captured there, she falls in love with her captor. This message this sends young girls then becomes that a guy can abuse you and treat you poorly as long as he does so out of love. Disney is a dangerous entertainment business. It represents corporations and entertainment, American cultural critic Henry SECTION TWO

Giroux says. It has made a spectacle of innocence, hides behind it; creates a fantasy that never needs to be questioned. A fantasy that children are exposed to before they can even talk. Disney has taken an unprecedented control of the media. And when a

conglomerate is as powerful as they are, they become the

predominant storytellers that mold how the world is portrayed based on corporate interest. Gender roles are constructed for children by the media. Our culture of sexism will never change because the sexist depiction and role of females in Disney film has not changed since the 1940s. Disney assigns each of their female characters, even animal ones, the role of a seductress; A concept that does not mirror reality but rather constructs a new reality for young children. Female characters often use their “femininity” to their advantage. They distract enemies with their beauty; manipulate others into doing their biding. Use their bodies to achieve what they want –which can feasibly be done in reality but provides our children with the concept that it’s acceptable to do so. Slowly female characters evolve with our culture. In Mulan, an independent female almost single handedly wins a war, however was only able to do so by dressing up as a male, and upon arriving home assimilated back into the female role she held before the war.

SECTION TWO

Disney also teaches stereotypes for race. It teaches history falsely,

and portrays minorities in the same stereotyped roles in almost every film. They pick apart historical events, such as in Pocahontas, and teach children only one aspect of the story -the one that shines a better light on Americans. Minorities such as African Americans are often portrayed as crows, or gators, or other animals that are extremely stereotyped in the southern Cajun style, and are most often depicted as the villains. This is similar to the Twilight film series. The story focuses on a quiet girl, a girl that many young kids can identify with, and the toxic relationship between her and her lover. It talks about very adult experiences that glamourizes obsessive behavior, encourages girls to give up everything to be with the one they love and endure emotional trauma while doing so. It teaches young girls that turmoil is just part of love. Young girls are captivated, and even obsess over the movie; an audience that is mainly made up of 10-16 year olds, an age group that should not consider toxic relationships to be the norm, yet does. Aside from the warped moral views that kids are being fed by the media, kids are also being negatively impacted by technology. Toddlers can use an iPad before they can eat solid food. They are learning how to use and be proficient at operating technology at extremely young ages. And however much of an advantage this can be, it is simultaneously a disadvantage. This generation can benefit in most work fields by growing up knowing how to use technology, but when children are constantly tethered to technology, they loose their imagination. One argument is that many apps are educational or stimulating SECTION TWO

for children, but games are built with software that only allows for outcomes that are already designed. Kids that would rather play with their video games instead of playing with blocks and dolls are not using the full extent of their imagination and creativity.

TITLE

Caption

SECTION TWO

Then as kids grow older, they enter one of the most awkward

stages in life- the preteen years. Luckily media is there to show them examples of how to get through it. Disney Channel is a good example of how shows that are thought to be kosher for kids, actually focus on things such as dating and affection. Kids are learning to imitate these shows and are becoming more curious about the subject depicted from a younger age. No one should be telling a child what age he or she is supposed to start kissing or having sex, because every person is different. Magazines even tell young kids how to kiss. Young adults relate to a fictitious reality in media, but they relate it to their own reality. The 90s generation was influence by shows like Boy Meets World and Lizzie McGuire. Sitcoms that would teach kids how to deal with normal situations that would rise in their lives, and what their lives should look like. TITLE Caption

Corporate media holds a lot of power and can dictate the content of television. Content that portrays the dating world, sex, violence, abuse, friendships, parties and language- subjects that the youth will assume is reality until they are proven wrong. Violence and sex are the most obvious and popular subjects shown in the media, both portrayed with a blasĂŠ attitude that is passed down to young adults, desensitizing them from the actual SECTION TWO

harshness of each subject. Every movie, from Pixar to Michael Bay films, indoctrinates audiences with the belief that the best way to reach goals and solve problems is through aggression and sex. Children are attracted to these features in movies and toys similarly

to the way adults are. But without supervision, they become

misguided and learn through the media that a good role model is made up of brute strength and not brains. They learn that Duane Johnson and Vin Diesel are the only role models they need. Media socialization also causes children to be misguided. This is to say that the media preference of young kids is shaped through social class; parents contribute to the kind of media their children prefer in the early childhood years. They foster their kids’ tastes through both, guidance and their own behavioral examples. Kids then grow up to imitate what they see and if all they are exposed to is made up of fickle and brain rotting content then this generation will inevitably breed another generation of “Honey Boo Boos.” But aside from sexualized or misguiding ‘role models,’ the media also glamourizes the party scene to no end. It is perpetually idealized in film and television and passed on from generation to generation. “The American Psychological Association released an analysis in 2011 that looked at over 80,000 participants ages 16-24, finding a 40% correlation between risk glorifying media content and risk-taking behaviors. Moreover the study found that 56% of the participants showed positive emotions towards risk-taking behaviors. Another study found alcohol related images get children thinking that alcohol is desirable, as young as 3rd grade! And no wonder. The alcohol industry spent $1.7 billion in media advertising in 2009!” –Yalda T. Uhls The Internet is a whole new beast for the new generation. Kids are privy to technology and when given access, will find the most unsavory things. The lessons they learn from the Internet, while most bored, lonely, and disturbed adults that find no other home than in anonymity.

SECTION TWO

given the opportunity to be educational, are often taught by the

72% of teens think watching TV with a lot of sexual content

influences their peers’ behavior somewhat or a lot. Programs with sexual content average 4.4 scenes per hour. On average, music videos contain 93 sexual situations per hour, including 11 hard-core scenes depicting behavior like intercourse and oral sex. Between 1998 and 2005, the number of sexual scenes on TV nearly doubled. 1 in 5 children will be approached by a sexual predator online. 15-to 24-year-olds account for nearly half of all STD diagnoses each year. Watching a lot of sexual content on TV and listening to sexually explicit music lyrics increase the chances that a teen will have sex at an earlier age. 60% of female video game characters are presented in a sexualized fashion.

SECTION TWO

The biggest users of online pornography are 12-17 year-old boys.

STEP BY STEP GUIDE

Many steps to shield your children or relatives are simple, and some are not. Firstly, educate and talk with your young ones so that lessons come from your mouth before the media. Throw away all of your Cosmo magazines, Us weeklies, and Victoria’s Secret mail-ins. Turn off the Disney channel, block most channels, and take out the television from your children’s or siblings rooms. If media entertainment is a necessity for very young kids, choose carefully and guide them into an interest in educational programs rather than mindless ones. Teach them that technology is to be put to good use. Take the iPhone and laptop away from any kid under 16. Block and monitor your Internet. Teach them that the media is not reality, and the only way to experience reality is to shut off the technology.

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

THE NORMALCY OF PORNOGRAPHY “Don’t make me feel weird cause I like porn, you’re weird for not liking porn. I’m normal as shit.” –Jonah Hill, “Superbad”

Mainstream America runs on a sex driven agenda. On one hand, the culture is so oversaturated with sex and porn that it’s seeped into our entertainment, fashion, advertising and even politics. But porn also has been one of the main catalysts for developing new technologies. It encourages the experimentation with new media and seeks out practical and profitable investments through mainstream media. Historically, porn has popularized new forms of technology since the invention of print. In the beginning, smutty content came in lengthy pamphlets. It wasn’t until the late nineteenth century that brassy novels began to emerge into mainstream society. These socalled “pulp” novels would become a publishing project financed by the government, which consequently led to later popularity with the public. It was the first time where porn helped the growth of

A few hundred years later, the birth of the photography industry caused a surge of pornography circulation during the Civil War.

SECTION TWO

new technology.

The war front demanded erotica from home and soon the mailing

traffic was bursting with everything from dirty books to erotic daguerreotypes and photographs. However, the interest was still taboo, and soldiers hid pictures under their beds or used stereoscopic photos that required a special folder to be seen. Sexual liberation began to emerge a century later. In the 1950s came the Kinsey studies. Alfred Kinsey, using data gathered from 1938 to 1963 on the sexual behavior of males and females, shed a new light onto the sexual lives of Americans. Playboy magazine began publication in the 1950s and famous porn films such as Deep Throat and Behind the Green Door were made in the ’70s. Before this time, the U.S. hadn’t been introduced to the idea of sex in cinema. The debut of the O’Farrel Theater in San Francisco in 1969 marked a sexual revolution for the silver screen. This old theater was opened by brothers who transformed it into a pleasure palace for the public. Honorary night manager and Gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thomson described it as the “… Carnegie Hall of Public sex in America.” Around that same time, Broadway embraced the craze when the sexual musical “Let My People Come” premiered in 1974.

TITLE SECTION TWO

Caption

SECTION TWO

The availability of porn only increased from that point, thanks to

continued advancements in technology that gradually made porn accessible in more varied and discreet manners. Erotic content no longer had to be obtained in smutty alleyway exchanges or underthe-counter. People wanted to watch porn behind closed doors and in the comfort of their own home, and slowly new technology would make this a reality. At its full swing, the technological era gave way to the emergence of videotape as a cheaper alternative to film and television production. The introduction of pornography into the home began when Sony designed Betamax tapes. Originally, they offered one-hour of content for home recording. But when the market for videotapes demanded longer tapes, VHS surfaced, becoming an industry standard and driving its competitor off the market. By the time DVDs and digital TV took the main stage, the porn industry was directing its attention video on demand. With the emergence of the Internet, on-demand videos can be viewed using wireless networks and portable devices. Online streaming is continuing the development of video in the twenty first century. The billion dollar porn industry as we know it today is forever evolving. Companies, like the subjects in the videos they peddle, are always willing to experiment with methods to get their product to market as quickly and easily as possible. The online market sought to attract viewers by offering a taste of free content, things like free pornographic photos to attract people to pay for a full product. Soon, this small amount of â&#x20AC;&#x153;freeâ&#x20AC;? became a lot bigger. Competition between suppliers of porn evolved free photography into free video clips, costing them more than what they were giving away. Now, the public doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have to pay for sex, but SECTION TWO

rather access to sex. Porn manufacturers are constantly searching for the next hi-tech innovation that will help put the shame factor attached to their

project under the rug. Under the nature of supply and demand,

they have in this way led the development of technology. Porn and technology have developed a partnership: each works with the other to meet both of their needs. From the earliest forms of photography to Internet and online media, the porn industry has overwhelmed most forms of communication technology, and will likely continue to do so.

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

SEX DRIVEN EFFECTS Fueled by Porn

Outside of being a technological catalyst, the sex industry also has become a thorn in society, negatively impacting private life in the bedroom and relationships and providing unnecessary sexual exposure to youth. Though porn has burrowed its way into the privacy of viewerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s homes, its popularity has made it less taboo and more a feature of mainstream culture. Overall, sexual relationships for women have suffered because of pornographic exposure. This goes beyond feelings of being cheated, to deterioration of marriages based on sexual disinterest. What has been negatively impacting the bedroom is porn addiction, a chemical addiction that produces a response in the brain similar to results of street drugs. The natural wave of endorphins and chemicals released during healthy intimacy generates positive benefits for partners, but when theyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re released system. This forms new connections between pleasure and porn, instead of pleasure and the physical action of sex. With the Internet, pornography has become accessible, affordable, anonymous and

SECTION TWO

during addictive behaviors, they can rewire the brain and nervous

aggressive. Sixty million people in the U.S. fall under this

“drug” use. The amount of people addicted to porn is alarming, but consider the amount of sexual content we’re confronted with on a daily basis. The sexuality of America is constantly staring us in the face, taunting us and influencing our decisions. It’s abundant on television, in music, in the news, online and in every direction we look. Society is daily confronted with a swarm of images that negatively impact the way some people look at sexuality. Among the most affected are women and young girls who are glamorized as sex objects in advertisements. In 2006, the skin care line, Clinique, ran a moisturizer ad that featured a close up of a woman’s face with the advertised milky lotion dripped on her face, covering her cheek, lip and eyelid. This ad clearly sought to play off another type of “facial,” of the porn variety, as a playful way to reach their audience. In a different ad, this one for Old Spice, which targets a male audience, we see a woman being depicted licking ice cream in a sensual manner,

SECTION TWO

supposedly to advertise personal hygiene. The copy reads,

SECTION TWO

“… She is only eating it because it tastes good …” and suggests

its young, male viewer “keep it clean,” insinuating that that if you do not keep it clean, she will not eat it, so to speak. One can imagine what sorts of things a young, male audience is imagining such a woman licking. Both of these ads would not make any sense outside of the porn culture we live in. Even as recent as 20 years ago, these ads would likely have been unacceptable for print, and even incomprehensible. However, for today’s sex-savvy audience, these ads are a catchy way to attract youth attention. Porn sells, and marketing teams harness this aspect of our society to brand their products. Everything about these ads that works to sell the product could work simultaneously work to sell porn. Music, in particular, revolves around sex. Mainstream pop, hip-hop and other genres embrace sexually explicit content in their lyrics and music videos, as well as on the dance floor. The influence of celebrities such as Madonna, Paris Hilton, Britney Spears and TITLE

SECTION TWO

Caption

Snoop Dogg has transformed once back alley porn into a popular

form of entertainment. Porn is such a dominant aspect of our media that the line has been blurred between what is considered adult content and what is child safe. In 2011, reality TV showed how blurred the line really is when a mom on the TLC show, “Toddlers and Tiaras,” dressed 2-year-old Mia in an outfit referencing a very adult concert by Madonna, during which she wore her now-famous cone bra. And while these sort of pageants constantly face age-inappropriate controversies, this outfit, especially, shows the direction our culture has taken. This is a culture where a gold body suit with a pointed bra is viewed and celebrated by some as acceptable for a 2-year-old. These shows depict a subculture where children strive to reach ideal beauty at extremely young ages. Moms have their kids’ teeth bleached and give them eyebrow and body waxes, fake eyelashes, fake nails and tans, prosthetic teeth and even Botox. Sexualization is happening to a younger demographic than ever. Thongs are marketed to 9-year-olds and padded bras to 8-yearolds, and clothes with a more sexualized style or messages are sweeping across the consumerist market. This style of clothing was introduced in the late 1990s, and by definition, is clothing that displays the female body as a sexual commodity. Historically, these skimpy outfits originated in strip clubs and porn movies of the ’80s. But kids have no notion of the negative connotations of what they wear. They just feel empowered and cooler by wearing more adult type clothing. Even more shocking is the age at which kids are being exposed to pornography itself. The average age at which a kid starts viewing porn is 11 to 12 years of age. The demographic with the greatest start, a focus on sexualization, available medication and cosmetic surgery, anyone can be on their way to become a porn star. But more are on their way to feeling inadequate and confused.

SECTION TWO

use of pornography ranges from age 12 to 17. With such an early

An ad created by Canvas Lifestyle for the “Love Your Body Issue” of Marie Claire South Africa.

CHAPTER

THINSPIRATION Thin culture’s extent and the effect of the media and social networks

What things do you rarely see on women in print? Laugh lines, wrinkles, crow’s feet, freckles and moles that aren’t “distinctive,” scars, cellulite, stray hairs and generally any hair other than the strips above your eyes and the kind on your scalp. Women and men are being airbrushed into superhuman beings with immaculate complexions, simultaneously giving the world an inferiority complex. This impossible physical image is enforced by the Fashion Industry on their models, who starve themselves to the point of death just to be able to fit into a designer’s Spring collection. Images of the toothin, leggy models gliding down the runway are put into magazines and circulated worldwide. Images that give young girls the notion that that’s what they should look like, too, when in fact only a small percentage of all the women in the world have body types like those of the models being pictured in print. Only 5% of American females naturally possess the body type depicted in advertising1, and even they are digitally processed to look smaller than reality. SECTION TWO

Advertising doesn’t

solely sell a product; it sells the image of the product, the brand and lifestyle that comes with incorporating it into your lifestyle. Advertisements usually achieve this through the image of a man or woman already using the product in their

Before and after Photoshop’d Britney Spears.

life. However, these men and women are hardly ever what would be considered the normal, average, or regular human being. The realistic demographic of these products are rarely represented in print. Advertisements deliver a fantastical image of their product by presenting us with an ideal representation of human beauty. When viewing these advertisements, we are supposed to buy into the lifestyle that is being offered to us. Flawless models are shown living the life that we are supposed to want, and in doing this, advertisements are telling their demographic that to be a part of that way of life, they must look like these “perfect” people. Sometimes just a part of the model’s body will be in the ad, like a leg, torso, or back. These singled out body parts can become even more heavily altered due to the ad’s intense focus on them. When body parts are separated from the rest of the person in an ad they are dehumanized, since there is nothing connecting them to the image of whom they belong to. They no longer contain a semblance of a personality, and are turned into an objectified form

SECTION TWO

of beauty. These methods of advertising are especially detrimental to young girls. Jean Kilbourne, acclaimed writer and speaker on the ill effects of advertising, states “girls are not self-conscious until adolescence

Advertising Warner’s ad from 1967 promises to give you a “proportioned” body with the help of its undergarments.

when they hit a wall and their self-esteem plummets.” More and more young girls are being negatively impacted by the popularly fabricated “idealistic” body image portrayed in magazines. Here are some numbers:

among adolescents

SECTION TWO

Anorexia is the third most common chronic illness

95% of those who have eating disorders are between the

ages of 12 and 25.8 47% of girls in 5th-12th grade reported wanting to lose weight because of magazine pictures 69% of girls in 5th-12th grade reported that magazine pictures influenced their idea of a perfect body shape 42% of 1st-3rd grade girls want to be thinner 81% of 10 year olds are afraid of being fat According to the National Association of Anorexia Nervosa and Associated Disorders (ANAD), “up to 24 million people of all ages and genders suffer from an eating disorder in the U.S.” That’s roughly eight percent of the population. Additionally, out of all mental illnesses, eating disorders have the highest mortality rate, and that isn’t even including those deaths that are indirectly caused by an eating disorder. Those who suffer from an eating disorder may ultimately die of heart failure, malnutrition or suicide. Often, the medical complications of death are reported instead of the eating disorder that compromised a person’s health. The biggest instance of young girls being impacted by the pressure of society on having a perfect body is found on the Internet; with countless websites, blogs, and videos being created to support this image of thin, slender bodies. Plug in “thinspo” into any search engine and countless results pop up. Pinterest and Tumblr and even Instagram have been huge contributing factors in the surge of an online thinspiration culture with the abundance of images SECTION TWO

and inspirational quotes that glorify thin bodies. This content ultimately ends up being utilized by websites and blogs that promote self-harm and other destructive behaviors like proanorexia and pro-bulimia. Even YouTube has become a host for

videos promoting eating disorders.

Instagram recently made an attempt to resolve its thinspiration issue by updating the Community Guidelines and banning the ability to search for hash tags like “thinspo,” “anorexia,” and “bulimia.” Additionally, over 30,000 images were deleted from the website. The changes were detailed on the Instagram staff blog: “While Instagram is a place where people can share their lives with others through photographs, any account found encouraging or urging users to embrace anorexia, bulimia, or other eating disorders; or to cut, harm themselves, or commit suicide will result in a disabled account without warning. We believe that communication regarding these behaviors in order to create awareness, come together for support and to facilitate recovery is important, but that Instagram is not the place for active promotion or glorification of self-harm.” Pinterest quickly follow suit. Unfortunately, the content that both Instagram and Pinterest pledged to ban continues to exist, and the ability to search for those tags they claimed to block still remains. Much like how advertisements single out body parts, young girls are becoming increasingly critical about the appearance of singular parts One of the earliest anorexia nervosa case studies. Pictured above in 1866 and below in 1870 after treatment. Taken from the medical papers of Sir William Gull.

of their body, not just simply their overall weight. The most apparent example of this is the obsession with having a “thigh gap” –

SECTION TWO

Miss A—

The Gap Victoria Secret models pose

a space that exists between the inner thighs when a girl stands with her feet together. This “thigh gap” is something that is usually only found on the runway or on Victoria Secret models, and is misleading girls into believing that they are fat and overweight if they don’t have one. What often forgets to be mentioned is the adverse effects of anorexia on the body, even after one recovers. The longer someone has anorexia, the more likely they will die from it. Even if that person survives they can still carry lasting damage on almost every body system, especially the skeletal and cardiovascular systems.3 Bone mass loss can begin after just six months, and the heart quickly loses muscle and becomes weaker.3 Anorexia in young women has the ability to stop menstruation, even before a noticeable or serious weight loss, which consequentially affects

SECTION TWO

their fertility levels and ability to have children.3 While the resulting damage of anorexia may be reversible at a certain stage, many people see the disease as a “whim of spoiled rich girls” and treat it as a psychological disorder. The impact of anorexia’s medical complications is generally ignored until the

person suffering is noticeably (and scarily) thin. At this point, the disorder has made lasting damage to their bodies.3 While not all anorexia or bulimia can be caused by the influence of media, it can certainly be an influence in other cases. The most immediate thing that can be done to try and reverse the warped idea of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;idealâ&#x20AC;? body that magazines, runways, and advertisements have created is to create societal awareness and to directly challenge the source. Some magazines like Seventeen have already begun the transition of placing restrictions on the level of editorial retouching done. Meanwhile, Britain and France have created proposals to pass legislation requiring digitally altered photos to be labeled as such on a scale of 1 to 4, even detailing the changes made.4 While these regulations are a step in the right direction, the reality is that these retouched images remain and all that has been disclaimers relies on the ability of the reader to acknowledge that the image is a fabrication of ideal beauty and to separate that perception from reality.

SECTION TWO

done is slapping a disclaimer on them. The effectiveness of these

SECTION TWO

STAR Just one of the popular gossip magazines that capitalizes on the private lives of celebrities.

CHAPTER

CELEBRITY FIXATION The Superfan’s Obsession And How The Media Enables It

You can find them on just about every television channel. Their faces grace the covers of magazines that make up the shelves of the checkout lane at the grocery store – bold headlines in all capitals screaming with exclamations over who’s been cheating on who, who got dumped, whose plastic surgery went horribly wrong. Each one competes to distract and entertain the bored shopper patiently waiting to load their groceries on the conveyor belt. Curiosity and boredom gets the better of you and you pick one up out of either skepticism or amusement, intent on just a quick peek to tide over the wait. However, before you can locate the page that reveals the mystery on the cover of who that cellulite and stretch-marked bikini-clad butt belongs to, the conveyor belt begins to move again and it’s finally your turn. You’ve already got the magazine in your hand and the shelf is now past the person with a cart-full behind you. You think, it would be easier to just it back, so you lay it on top of your groceries and read the rest of it later.

SECTION TWO

spend the few dollars on the magazine than it would be to put

By buying one of these magazines you’ve just contributed to

the overwhelming industry that uses celebrity gossip as their moneymaker. The entertainment world has turned our interest of the celebrity into an industry that relies on that fascination in order to make a profit. It has created a cycle that relies on the obsessed “super fans” to drive demand and consumption for a product. Media continually scrutinizes celebrities, sometimes going so far as to rank their performance on a scale, categorizing them into lists based on their “bankability.” Entertainment journalist James Ulmer created the Ulmer Scale in order to “determine how lucrative utilizing certain superstars will be in projects.”1 The so-called A-List, B-List, etc., has become a popular term used to identify a celebrity’s level of fame, though it is more a figure of speech than a concrete list, since these “lists” are constantly in flux. These lists are then reported in a special publication called The Hot List using a grading system that accounts for “his or her willingness to travel and promote a film, professionalism, car management, risk factors and acting talent and range.”2 What’s perverse about this idea is that this scale is viewing the celebrity as a commodity. What’s more is this list probably wouldn’t even exist if it weren’t for critical focus of the celebrity by the media. An endless circle exists where a star plays into the opportunities presented by media in order to gain exposure. Media then capitalizes on this need in order to make money, creating more opportunities for celebrities to promote themselves. However, not all celebrities are interested in playing into the media’s trap; the media industry has ultimately led actors and singers to hire bodyguards to follow them around when going SECTION TWO

to events. Many of the same celebrities often have to hide behind sunglasses and hats when doing errands or going about their business just to avoid having their picture taken and their privacy exploited.

payday Star Mag pays its readers for gossip

SECTION TWO

CHEESE Photographers and paparazzi snap photos outside of an event

SECTION TWO

Celebrities are constantly struggling to protect their privacy and their image, but this becomes an exhausting feat when paparazzi stalk their every move and provoke them until the point of assault. Though this is not to say that some celebrities themselves donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t use this to their advantage. Some have learned to play the industry,

such as when a famous new mother poses for the cover of one

of those aforementioned magazines for millions of dollars, and again when these personalities are paid thousands to merely show up at an event. In any case, their lives are no longer solely their own. We have adopted their lives into ours, made their business our business, and mock outrage when they don’t perform up to our expectations. Technology has only perpetuated society’s relationship with the Celebrity. Social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr have allowed the breakdown of the metaphorical “fourth wall.” They separate the personality from the character they play on the screen and let us feel as though we are connected to them. On Facebook we can “friend” a celebrity, but that action is nothing but a number in part of a popularity contest. We do not truly know the celebrity; the celebrity does not know who we are. The majority of these virtual fan clubs are run either by fans or a team created specifically for that purpose. Recently, TMZ published photos of Justin Bieber where he appeared to be smoking weed. Fans of Bieber’s began posting on Twitter with the hashtags #cuts4bieber or #cuttingforbieber with photos of freshly bleeding wrists. It was later found that the initial tweets were posted by Internet trolls posing as fans as part of a prank. Other “true” fans then saw these posts and carried the prank to its media-worthy scale. However the validity of these images is not the issue. The concern over this event lays in the obsessive and disturbing behavior of the fans, made up of mostly young girls, and their believe that reacting in this way is acceptable.

Bieber Twitter campaign took place. The same pranksters

SECTION TWO

It wasn’t too long before this incident that a similar Justin

SILVER MEDAL

SECTION TWO

Singer-songwriter Lady Gaga is currently in second place behind Justin Bieber for the most Twitter followers.

had once again manipulated Twitter. The Huffington Post claims

that the prank started with a screenshot from Entertainment Tonight’s official Twitter account, which announced that Bieber “had been ‘disagnosed with cancer’ and ‘suggested that fans go #BaldforBieber in support of the pop sensation.’”3 Stuart Fischoff, PhD and spokesman for the American Psychological Association and professor of media psychology at the California State University at Los Angeles, has academically studied the cult of the celebrity and believes that the “very need to find an idol and follow him is programmed into our DNA.”4 He says, “What’s in our DNA, as a social animal, is the interest in looking at alpha males and females; the ones who are important in the pack.” Even though this might be true, there is a difference between the casual follower and the obsessed. In fact, this obsession has been clinically diagnosed as “celebrity worship syndrome,” for which psychologists have established a sliding scale. Again, media continues to facilitate these obsessed super fans. The “Hollywood spin machine… purposefully set us up to admire and even covet something we can never have… then… when we are completely vulnerable, they sell us the image even harder – from headlines that ‘titillate us with ‘celebrity secrets,’ to the books, diets, cosmetics, foods, jewelry, and clothes that promise we’ll be closer to the ones we adore… There are fortunes being made by turning fans into victims and it all starts by creating that frenzy known as celebrity worship.”4 What separates the casual follower from the obsessed is the ability for the casual one to recognize and separate the celebrity’s life from our own. SECTION TWO

SECTION TWO

TRUE LIFE Title sequence for MTV’s longrunning reality series

CHAPTER

WHAT’S YOUR REALITY? The Pervasiveness Of Reality Television

The popularity of reality television didn’t gain momentum until 1992, when MTV’s The Real World came into existence. Claiming to be completely real, the show was crafted and molded by experts into a controversial hit that produced serious ratings and paved the way for the ensuing an onslaught of copycats. Contributing editor and writer for the Huffington Post, Debra Ollivier, recalls her time working as a story editor on “American Detective,” another reality TV show in the nineties. Every show began with the disclaimer: “What you are about to see is real. There are no re-creations. Everything was filmed while it actually happened.”1 Despite this, the show was heavily doctored. Ollivier claims that over 6,000 to 12,000 minutes of film was analyzed, from which a 15-minute highlight reel was produced. The overall effect of the highlight reel was to deliver an “action-packed segment criminals,”1 when in reality, the entirety of the unedited footage often “compromised the integrity of the detectives: Violence and abuses of power, lewd profanity, extreme sexism, harassment and

SECTION TWO

that portrayed the cops as heroes and everyone else as dangerous

garden-variety cruelty.”

Neil Postman wrote “Amusing Ourselves to Death” in 1985, before reality TV began to gain widespread popularity. The book “envisioned a world where everything, including TV news, was a ‘packaged commodity.’”1 Postman wrote that our “insatiable appetite for entertainment and distraction might ultimately pacify us, turn everything into a curated narrative, and obscure our ability to think freely and clearly about what’s real and what’s not.” This statement has come to fulfillment, especially in the case of reality TV. Viewers of reality television can feel a sense of escape when watching extravagant escapades of an heiress. They even use it as a placebo in order to temporarily forget their own problems by finding comfort in the fact that there are others that have more dysfunctional lives than their own. One woman talked with Good Morning America about the extent of her addiction to reality TV. She claims to watch an average of 20 reality TV shows a week - achieving this by “recording four reality episodes daily on two televisions with different DVRs.”2 Multiple television sets allows her to watch the shows while others are recording. She acknowledges her addiction and says, “It’s so pathetic, yet every week I have to see these people… [It’s] like they’re my friends, like I know them.”2 She claims that the reason she watches reality TV is because it makes her feel better about herself. She said, “you’re looking at all these other people, and they’re really a bunch of losers. So, it sort of validates yourself, like ‘Oh, I’m not that bad.’” Part of the reason reality TV is so pervasive is that it is relatively SECTION TWO

cheap to make. Though, that is just a part of a larger equation. Wray Herbert, book author and contributor to the Huffington Post, points to a “deep human need for narrative.”3 He believes that the purely basic allure of reality TV can be “traced back to ancient story telling

TITLE Caption

traditionsâ&#x20AC;Ś [In which] we see parts of ourselves in these modernday folk tales, just as we construct stories about our own personal realities.â&#x20AC;?3 He also attributes this to the human need to create a personal, coherent narrative identity.3 This need has led us into a state of vegetation and mind numbing addictions. Conditions that support the vision of Postman mentioned earlier. As long as there is a market for reality television and an interest by the viewers in that sort of material, reality television will continue to exist and the distorted perceptions of reality versus reality television will continue to exist.

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

DISTORTION IN THE MASS MEDIA The U.S. news media was developed as a critical source of information dedicated to furthering our understanding of the world. Today, whether by watching news networks, picking up a newspaper or reading an article online, mass media is still where people turn for current event news. But todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s media funnels down only a narrow selection of information into our homes. Much of media is tailored to what we want to see, not what we need to see. We subject ourselves to a distorted perception of the world, which is becoming increasingly egocentric with the shift in the media and the flow of information in the United States. Growth in the areas of information and communication are partially responsible for mediaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s downfall. Because the availability of information has increased, mass media has changed the transmission of information and news, shifting from physical This shift has been occurring since the invention of the printing press, one of the most significant advancements in the field of mass communication. The printing press allowed an proliferation

SECTION TWO

print products, such as newspapers, to technological media.

of newspapers and other printed media on a massive scale. Later,

radio and then television became prime sources of information and globalization of news increased. Mass media as it exists in the 21st century relies on the Internet to help further broadcast news. According to the PEW research center, as of 2011, American Internet usage has more than quadrupled to 78 percent from 14 percent in 1995, making online information a prominent source in our balanced news diet. A preference for online journalism over print media has developed due to the easy accessibility of information. A variety of knowledge is available free and publically, found on blogs, webcasts, podcasts and social networking sites. Because of this freedom to upload any information, the integrity of what is found on the Internet is in question. Unreliable sources speaking as experts abound in this digital world. But they are not the only untrustworthy elements of todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mass media. Advancements in technology and our cultureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s heavy focus on capitalism has created fresh opportunities for business, special interest groups and areas of the government to reach the nation in powerful ways. These groups, often with political motives, manipulate the presentation of information to highlight and promote their single views and values. Facts and statements that circulate the media are often biased, despite the advertised unbiased nature of journalism that America seems to honor. Truth in reporting is not necessarily the issue. At its core, journalism is supposed to be a constructive force meant to supply diverse world-wide views to the public and keep subjectivity at bay. This is why the media is often referred to as the fourth branch of the government. As the other branches of government work on a system of checks and balances, so too does SECTION TWO

the media work to check the government and call out discovered abuse of the democratic process. At itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s heart, news media exists to create an informed society. But, like the judicial, executive and legislative branches, media has power over the people it serves.

Media bodies have the ability to select which stories receive

coverage and how they will be presented — selectivity we are often unaware of. So many seem to look at the media landscape through rose-colored glasses. An average American may see their media consumption as varied and informative, but that’s far from reality. Online, information is filtered by our searches and modified based on what would seems more appealing to us. Google is guilty of doing this, and Facebook as well. The Huffington post and the Washington Times are two news outlets that filter searches for us. They look at over 57 different signals to determine what would interest readers most. These factors range from where you are located to which browser or computer you use. In this sense, each and every one of us lives in a personally filtered bubble —a universe of information tailored to our individual interests. Information that goes into our bubbles is not only decided by us, but also by robotic algorithms. Information excluded from us will often remain unknown. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, in which he discussed how information Google gathers about visitors is used, the company’s CEO, Eric Schmidt, admitted, “The power of individual targeting — the technology will be so good it will be very hard for people to watch or consume something that has not in some sense been tailored for them.” This sort of subjectivity is small-scale, altered to fit individual interests. On larger scales of control are the big corporations that dominate today’s media market. Not only do they influence selection of the information presented to the public, but they also shape the content and tone. These corporations have the power

This level of power and influence by large conglomerates was

SECTION TWO

to pick and choose which material is broadcast and which is not.

not always the structure for public communication. Funding and

ownership of public communication in the U.S media has changed from a predominantly family-owned and independent structure to a more publicly-traded, group-owned media chain. In 2002, there were ten corporations that dominated the majority of television, radio, Internet and film media sources. In 2004, this number was down to five: GE, AOL/TIME Warner, Disney, News Corporation, Bertelsmann and VIACOM. These few control what information is covered and how it is represented. When media was family owned, profits were not the main priority. Focus was set on serving the public interest. During this time, the media was regarded as a public trust. There was less competition and there were limitations on entering, which prevented oversaturation in the industry. Looking at todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s conglomerates, we see a constant pressure over companies to generate a profit. With a larger focus on the Internet, an easier, less expensive, and timelier medium for reporting news, large news companies have been able to shrink their staffs. Time Inc. laid off 600 employees in 2006 followed by 289 employees in 2007. Reporters are expected to be able to photograph as well as report. In lieu of dispatching reporters to cover stories in other states or countries, they can pull stories from wire news services, such as The Associated Press. And while this saves companies money, it results in less investigative reporting and less original coverage around the world. As with any product, public demand determines supply. When it comes to news coverage and information, the public chooses the most profitable subject matter. For local television, this means more local crime reporting, adding truth to adage, â&#x20AC;&#x153;If it bleeds, it SECTION TWO

leads.â&#x20AC;? If we were to draw a map of the world and distribute the news coverage of countries worldwide, one might assume there is an equal amount of information covered worldwide; however, this is not the case. What we actually see is that U.S. news puts the

most importance on U.S. news. Coverage is 79 percent focused

on America and 21 percent on the rest of the world. But from that 21 percent, U.S. news mainly focuses on Iran and the Middle East; only 1 percent of the news in that 21 percent covers areas such as China, South America or India. These countries see little coverage despite large populations. If large corporations are to be in control, citizens and consumers have to hold them responsible for relevant and accurate reporting. We need to make sure they show us the uncomfortable. We need to make sure we seek out information and demand unbiased education. We need to remind them that the public news media is intended to connect us with those we cannot reach, instead of leaving us isolated in a sea of one. Journalism plays an important role in U.S. culture, but we need to make sure itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s playing the right one.

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

THE IMPORTANCE OF EVERYTHING And The Value Of Nothing

As a society, we are on the brink of oblivion. Inform yourself. If you begin to look with objective eyes, you will see the backward ways that have developed in our culture. The shift from a feeling of freedom and cultural prosperity to a regressive and uncaring population did not happen overnight. Throughout history, humanity has struggled with the concepts of freedom and liberty. These are ideals can only be realized by society if they are felt in the hearts of individuals. The spirit of complacency and entitlement that has settle over the U.S. will only contribute to our downfall. We need to accept responsibility for our own shortcomings. Before we can fix the whole, we must fix ourselves. And before we can fix ourselves, we must understand how we got to this point. Humanity created government out of a perceived need for communal protection. The idea of protection, a safe haven from rudimentary need for protection came a cycle that is proving to be self-destructive. This cycle is growth. Most of the time, growth is considered to be a trait of a prosperous society. However, all

SECTION TWO

fear, is the underlying justification for government. From this

growth does not coincide with the ideas of freedom and personal

liberty. There is a difference between growth that is helpful and growth that is cancerous. The enemy of beneficial growth is not one physical thing â&#x20AC;&#x201D; the enemy is an idea, and the idea is centralized control. Centralized control creates limits: economic limits, limits on freedom, intellectual limits. Control stifles good types of growth and rebrands itself as the fix. When tackling an issue, one must first identify the problem. Once the problem is identified, logic, reason, and trial and error will eventually get you back on course. Just as problems of this magnitude rarely arise overnight, there is no quick fix. Communication, culture, and control are not independent of each other. They are all cogs in the human machine, turning in unison to create humanity. The integration of man and machine has already begun, long before the computer age. A complex mass of potential and reality exist at the depths, hidden from the public sphere in a cloud of political correctness, apathy, and ignorance. The importance of a public sphere grows with each and every

THE AMERICAN MACHINE

human thought. Nothing exists outside of its influence. This

concept of shared public knowledge is both daunting and exciting.

It can allow for exponential growth or absolute tyranny through the control of hearts and minds. There are a multitude of factors that

drive how and what content enters the public sphere. Most of these are driven by technology; advancements in industrialized printing indisputably created free society. But this cannot exist on itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

own. For example, print would not be successful if paper was too expensive. Compounding sectors of culture allows for growth. We, as humans, are not inherently ruled beings. Individuals SECTION TWO

are born free, without ties to any nation, culture, or idea. These are learned through experience. At its most fundamental point, government exists to serve us free beings, but that has not always been the case. When government becomes obsolete and corrupt,

SECTION TWO

we should not be its minions. The idea that control and regulation

is the answer is what causes most of our economic, social and cultural problems. The fix is conceptually simple, but logistically a huge struggle against established traditions, For one, many fail to see where the evil lies with centralized control. Many schemes begin, not outwardly malicious in nature, but with the best of intentions. These intentions and ideals — founded on the philosophy of individualism, hard work, community, ingenuity, and love of humanity — are rotting the nation from the inside out. It is time to oust these wayward and perverse practices. Anything that takes away from individual liberty and freedom — be it monetary, intellectual, or pertaining to civil liberties — cannot be justified. American citizens need to come to realize the fact that nothing is free and the government does not produce services. The government is a consumer, indiscriminate and reliant on whims and emotions, just like any other consumer. The problem is centralized control, a lust for material pleasure, a lack of spirituality, a sense of entitlement, a penchant for accepting mediocrity, and a reputation for thwarting innovation and growth through policy. Policies that help the transfer of control from the individual to a centralized authority include higher taxes, executive orders and new laws. The federal government has grown exponentially since the 1920s under the guise of the common good. A slow decline of personal and economic freedom has been in the works since the Great Depression. This shift in control from the individual to the state has gone by calmly unnoticed, limiting the freedom, purchasing power SECTION TWO

and general welfare of nation in the process. Cultural growth and a sense of community is left to rot while the powers that be grow more powerful and influential in our daily lives. Nothing is free. If it is free, it costs your freedom. Without freedom, a culture, originally

rich and diverse, will become dulled and muted.

$1,974,042,215,000: thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the total amount spent on supplementary and excessive centrally-organized and mandated programs. Money is power, and power corrupts. When left to its own accord, unchecked power always turns to an authoritarian state. The deepest of transgressions is the willingness to sell freedom for a sense of wellbeing and perceived safety while our leaders spend us into oblivion. The desire and potential to be a sovereign individual lies at the very core of being. It is there. Many government programs, despite their best intentions to realize this, ultimately create a stagnant and uncaring culture with an artificial sense of wealth. Government is not, and was not, intended as a solution. It has developed into a crutch that has broken our culture and our very way of life. The concepts of self-reliance and personal responsibility are of utmost importance. We cannot expect change to occur if we do not experience that change on an individual level. We have been given the tools to create a great nation, it is time to rethink and rebuild. We are in this predicament, not because of the governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s failure but because of our own, in ourselves and in letting negative growth occur. We have become increasingly dependent on others, when we first must first learn to provide for ourselves.

SECTION TWO

CASE STUDY

will the real robot please stand up? “We seem to be made to suffer. It’s our lot in life.” –C3PO (Star Wars)

As a culture, we’re prone to anthropomorphize many of the tools our technological age has provided. Some people name their cars and claim to understand their personalities. We have little, not very intelligent Roombas that sweep our floors. Some of us are developing a fondness for a seemingly smarter, body-less woman named Siri (in actuality, a feminine voice in the form of a phone app that both frustrates and informs). GPS in our cars vocally tells us, in no uncertain terms, where to go in a dialect, accent, or character voice of our choosing. Today’s gadgets inform, comfort, entertain, protect, transport, and educate us to the degree that many lives would be in chaos without them. We are finding ourselves in relationships with these tools — tools that are becoming more and more advanced and similarly entwined in our everyday routines.

labors. So what happens when these tools, products of our own invention, become so advanced that they not only can access

SECTION TWO

More and more, humans are creating robots to take over everyday

DATA: MAN OR MACHINE?

any of the information accumulated by mankind, but also perform actual thought? Should these robots advance into super beings that can think for themselves, will they continue to obey a human master? Will they come to a realization that they are used as slaves and meant for that purpose? In the movie “Bicentennial Man,” a manufactured robot, Andrew, becomes the servant to a family for several years. Over time, as reconstruction gives him more humanistic features, he begins to understand and feel emotions. He even falls in love with a human. If the advancement of robots continues, will robots like Andrew want to be considered human? Now matter how far or soon into the future it takes, scientists believe that the technological singularity is inevitable. According to the theoretical physicist Michio Kaku, a superintelligence could be a danger to our world. Kaku, believes that humans need to embrace the coming singularity while making sure humans stay in control. He suggests that we create a super computer that downloads knowledge from our brains which be accessed and downloaded to other brains. This way, humans will always be superior to artificial intelligence. Sci-fi author Vernor Vinge claims that the artificial intelligence singularity would be the point at which everything in our current culture would change. But this possible step in technology is not without debate. The ethical and philosophical questions about these changes have been best explored in the film “Star Trek: Nemesis,” through a fictional, sentient android character, Data. Through his characterization, Data illustrates a positive view of the outcome of the relationship between artificial intelligence and humans, and serves as a foreshadowing of the future of robotics.

SECTION TWO

Data was a human creation assimilated into human culture. As a Star Fleet officer, he was dedicated to the mission of Star Fleet, where he served admirably. His stature in Star Fleet was a result of years of service and dedication not only to the Federation, but also to the human race. His goal was

to become as human as possible. In “Nemesis,” Data achieved a promotion

to first officer, but also, at times, experienced emotion, something he did not have for a long time. So important was Data’s quest for human qualities that Jonathan Frakes’ character, Commander Riker, once referred to him as “Pinocchio,” the puppet that wanted to become a real boy. Though it was his goal to become more human, Data was always a machine. Character Dr. Noonien Soong created him in his own image as a mechanical with a positronic brain. This term, coined by sci-fi legend Isaac Asimov, describes a fictional device that provides artificial intelligence and in some cases sentient thought. Because of this, Data was a robot, but was able to choose to enroll in Star Fleet Academy and become an officer. He chose to serve the Federation of Planets. But what happens when a sentient being chooses not to be a tool for mankind or any other biological intelligence? Data did not always do as he was told. In an episode of “Star Trek: The Next Generation,” Data disobeys orders in order to save little machines, called exocomps, that he, but no one else, considered sentient life forms. In another episode, Data is seduced by a darker emotional experience that was a result of killing. He and his brother, Lore, team up in an attempt to destroy biological life and begin the artificial life forms’ takeover before his human counterparts bring him under control. These fictional events, among others, are significant in showing the human mark, good or bad, on its own creations — a sign that artificial intelligence could be part of the human experience allowing humans and androids a future together. This future together is marked by what most would say is the creator’s gift of free will to its creation and support of that free will to develop a bond. In Mary Shelly’s “Frankenstein,” the artificially-created life form sought a relationship with its creator. It was the denial of that relationship that caused and his freedom, creating a bond that inspired Data to logically

SECTION TWO

suffering. With Data, his human friends repeatedly supported his judgment

SECTION TWO

TOMORROW Robot at Walt Disney World Photo by Andrea Pejack

choose the path of being an ally to the human race.

In the television episode, “The Measure of a Man,” a Starfleet officer, wanting to disassemble Data and study his make up, claims Data is property of Star Fleet and as such has no rights. The resulting trial boils down to the question of whether Data has a soul. Defending him is Capt. Picard, who claims that all beings are created but not necessarily the property of their creator. Data was ruled to be free with the right to make his own decisions. Star Fleet’s desire for a race of disposable robots is likened to slavery. We see Picard come to the defense of Data’s rights as a sentient being again and again. Lieutenant Commander Geordi La Forge offers friendship. Riker recognizes Data’s aspirations. It is this kind of recognition and support which builds the positive relationship between Data and humans — the bond between man and machine. Like humans, androids may vary: some may be friendly, assimilating into the world to offer their own special contributions, while others may be seduced by darker influences. But, beings with artificial intelligence are by design logical, and peace is a productive, logical goal. If man becomes the creator of a new race of beings, they should look to their own creator and emulate the endowment of free will on their own creations in order to build a relationship and a promising future.

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

THERE’S AN APP FOR THAT In 1984, Apple revolutionized the technologic industry by introducing the first personal computer with a graphic user interface. In 2008, they revolutionized the cellphone industry with the iPhone. Originally created as Apple’s solution to bridging the gap between phone, mp3 player, and home computer, the iPhone has certainly gained popularity and not only has it opened a new business model but it’s also started a social obsession: apps. Apps are smaller versions of applications or websites you may find on your desktop computer -- taking up less space and with a more simplified interface. Apps make it easier for consumers to stay organized and up-to-date while on the go and because of the ease they present to consumers, they have inevitably become increasingly popular with the public.

to the advent of the iPhone, it was Apple that made it possible for anyone to create apps for their device, thanks to the release of a developer’s kit. Additionally, the implementation of a universal

SECTION TWO

While apps were available on certain smartphone devices prior

App Store made it easier for consumers to search, buy and

download apps according to what appealed to each demographic. Downloading apps became even more appealing with the increasingly wide selection of free apps available in the App Store; the apps that require purchase are priced anywhere from 99 cents to $4 or more, depending on how chock full of features they are. Even more important became the use of Apple’s innovative multitouch gestures which have allowed app developers to create a wide range of apps that utilize these features –such as the accelerometer used in mobile gaming, swipe gestures for easy navigation and workflow, the pinch-to-zoom feature, and more. Other companies such as Google (Android), Windows, or RIM (Blackberry), have begun to adopt these features as well, implementing them into their own apps. These applications have opened an entirely new way to communicate with our friends and family –even strangers from around the world. Social network entrepreneurs have infiltrated the app-world, turning almost every app into an opportunity for social media. Sure, this sounds exciting and fun and it may be a great way of keeping in touch and sharing your life with others –For artists of every kind, it’s a great way to display work and get feedback; for those who are into business networking, it’s a great way to get exposure– But like every good thing, social media has a conflicting negative side. Facebook, the most popular social network around the world, has about 1.06 billion monthly active users (as of December 31, 2012.) This site stores your personal information and uses it to determine what kind of advertisements should be directed towards you. Have SECTION TWO

you noticed that your wallet has been draining lately? If it’s not from buying so many 99-cent apps, it may be from buying all the cool new things that Facebook has subliminally been referring to you in your News Feed.

Social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Tumblr, have

transgress their web-based platforms and moved into creating mobile app version of their websites. However, there are several social networks that started as apps and don’t even exist in website format. Instagram, an app for posting pictures from your cellphone that mocks instant film, is one of these apps. An app called Vine does a similar thing with posting videos. These social networking platforms, however, aren’t the only things to hit the app world; there are several other types of apps that: allow for a more efficient workflow, help with navigation, that provide entertainment, act like credit cards, and more. In fact, with 775,000 apps in the App Store (as of January 2013,) its no wonder Apple trademarked the catchphrase “There’s an App for That” in 2009. Apple’s App Store may seem like the most popular platform for downloading apps, but iPhone users actually download fewer apps than consumers on other competing devices. The average Microsoft user downloaded 80 percent more apps, and BlackBerry users 43 percent more. Surprisingly, Android users actually downloaded five percent fewer apps than those with iPhones. What is this ever-increasing world of apps doing to society? Some may argue that apps have made our lives easier; helping us multitask and get business done on the go. And while this may true, apps are also making our society progressively lazy. We are no longer willing to challenge ourselves to figure out a simple math equation. Instead, we use the calculator app on our phone. Instead of being active and going to the store to buy something, we choose to buy it via apps and have it sent to our front door. Forgot how to spell something? Don’t feel like getting up to find the remote to feel like doing what your job requires of you? No worries, “There’s an App for That.”

SECTION TWO

your TV or turn your lamp on and off? Are you at work and don’t

Here’s a revelation that society seems to be in denial of: there isn’t

always an app for that. With such a vast selection of apps emerging in app stores of all platforms it’s easy to believe that everything imaginable is at your fingertips. App developers, however, are not magical genies that can poof whatever our hearts demand into existence. There will be times where an overly specific task you wish your phone did for you will simply not exist. But don’t fume and complain about such things. Instead of succumbing into purchasing the latest app that promotes laziness try to physically make an effort to accomplishing something yourself. Instead of experiencing the world around you through social apps,

SECTION TWO

go outside. Take two minutes to do the damn thing yourself.

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

imaginary friends Modern society could not exist without technology. Today, we can make calls to anywhere in the world with a device that’s smaller than a card deck. We have the abilitiy to store every shred of data from our lives inside the digital matrix — every picture we have ever taken, every song we have ever listened to, every word we have ever written, or read, and every thought we have ever had. For information we don’t already posess, there is the Internet. The Internet is relatively new to our society, only slightly more recent than the personal computer. Yet, already, it has amassed an unimaginable amount of information, with more added daily. Many utilize the Internet without a clue of how it works, treating it like a magic mirror able find any information we desire. We cannot always find what we are looking for, and what we do find is often of questionable veracity, but it is usually informative or entertaining enough to convince us to accept it. We do not question how the

In the tangled web of the Web, there are connection hubs, the water coolers of the digital world where social media fills the

SECTION TWO

Internet works, only that it does.

human need for communication. The sole purpose of sites like

Twitter is to quiet the silence and fill every gap with conversation or a meme. Social media is an artificial ego boost: you can track how many friends you have and document your life with all the small details, like what you had for lunch that day, that should just disappear. Since interaction appears to be beneficial, online socializing is never questioned, just wholeheartedly embraced. Maybe your friend Susie really does like your daily dinner plate shot, maybe you love saying happy birthday to someone every day, or maybe you just cannot wait for your friend’s next lyric quote; but eventually these interactions become a chore, a routine. You only partake because of the self-importance felt when this information is pushed in front of you, or the rush you get when people respond to something you’ve said. But would you remember everyone’s birthday without a Facebook reminder? Should typing a quick “Happy Birthday” count as good wishes, or even as human interaction, for that matter? Often times, the people you talk to online are the same you see everyday. So why click a button and press a few keys instead of picking up the phone, or going out for coffee? Human interaction needs a physical presence. What the Internet does promote is fantasy. At face value, the Internet seems like something out of a science-fiction story: a cyberspace where all information can be stored and accessed at any time. In fact, the Internet holds as much fiction as it does truth. In addition to databases and historical archives, the Web houses much of the animated and artificial world, be it text, photo, video or games. This fantasy world has its advantages and disadvantages. It represents a collective imagination, manufactured worlds with environments where people can explore and take a break from the real world. It shares similarities with older technologies, such as the SECTION TWO

television and radio. The disadvantage to this world comes when it is prioritized as more important than the real world. It can lead to Internet addiction and an inclination to take everything on the Internet as truth. This escapist’s dream realm can become reality

for someone detached from real society. Worse, it can attract

someone who is firmly in the world into its less tangible matrix. Social media, and the social elements in many technological portals, help perpetuate this condition. The digital screen creates a disconnect. This disconnect can be seen in the different stages removed from in-person communication. The base level is a face-to-face conversation between two people. This is a standard human interaction. Body motion and manner of speaking plays a part in conversation, often providing meaning and context. The next level removed from this, in terms of technology, is video chat. While a screen separates participants, they can still see much of the other’s body language and can hear inflections in speech. The next stage is the radio or a phone call. Neither form allows for visual communication, leaving participants to interpret meaning based only on vocal cues. The audio speaker and physical distance act as barriers. The third and final stage of disconnect is the text message, IM message, or email. Communication via typed messages looses both audio and visual language, even those cues that might appearing in a handwritten letter. Any visual communication is created by the screen, often only with text and restricted by font, size, color, and punctuation. The reader must interpret tone and meaning. This disconnect leaves the reader with only abstract representation of what a person means to say. If they’re lucky, they might have some help from textual emoticons. The further from face-to-face a conversation occurs, the easier it is for one party to create whatever world or interpretation they want, even if that means overlooking a few key words or statements. Furthermore, most text carries equal weight, making it harder to place emphasis through type than spoken inflections. Some online conversations are even reduced to the click of a button, such as

Technology has a habit of keeping this world within its confines,

SECTION TWO

Facebook’s “Like” feature.

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

PRESCRIBE ME: HOW ALL OF AMERICA IS SICK America Uses Medical Advancements To Treat Every Symptom Like A Disease.

“Between 1996 and 2004 industry spending on direct to consumer advertising rose over 500%.” – Big Bucks Big Pharma The medical field is tainted by capitalism. It is hard to find treatment these days, but easy to find drugs. Our TVs buzz with the long lists of side effects from the newest drug. Even our drugstores and doctor offices are littered with advertisements. Statistics are rising sky-high for diseases diagnosed today, but our doctors are quick to treat every symptom. Homeopathic medicine is a scarcity nowadays because it isn’t financially rewarding. The cure to cancer isn’t profitable either, but cancer sure is. We are scared into getting inoculated in order to fix each ache and sore, into numbing ourselves from pain. Everywhere we look medical companies advertise new drugs to us; on our TVs everywhere. Magazines and doctor offices constantly remind us that we need this hot new drug. All we have to do is go to our local pharmacy.

SECTION TWO

and in our drugstore, the use of pharmaceuticals are broadcasted

89 But why is it that the most harmful drugs are so easy to obtain from a doctor? These prescription drugs are the most commonly abused substances yet they’re easier to obtain than illegal drugs and produce the same type of addiction. Many prescription drugs available such as Vicodin, Oxycodon and Percocet have become the “substance of choice” for many. And doctors are quick to medicate patients. It is easier to prescribe than to diagnose and test. And we as consumers will do anything to fix our flaws and our minor symptoms. Prescription zit cream has been studied to cause suicidal tendencies and depression, sometimes leading to fatalities. But the masses still take the risk to get rid of a minor problem. Providing profitable products drives the pharmaceutical companies, just like any big conglomerate. It’s this very same reason that it’s said that major medical discoveries have been made that will not be marketed. Canadian researcher Dr. Evangelos Michelakis has found the cure for cancer, or so we hope. He has discovered a common drug that has been seen to reduce tumors by 70 percent in mice. However, research cannot move forward because this drug has no patent. This means that even though the drug would be potentially inexpensive for users, no big pharmaceutical company wants to sponsor the human testing because it won’t generate a profit. Backing the testing would also cost millions, and it would not be beneficial for the drug and medical industry to take interest in this drug. In other words, curing people in such an easy manner won’t

SECTION TWO

generate a profit. A cheaper alternative to pharmaceutical drugs would then be homeopathy – a natural substitute to man made medication. But homeopathic medicine is often overlooked in today’s society. We

simply aren’t compelled to use it, because what we are drawn to

is what is sold to us through the media. Nobody is pushing us to use things that are cheap and effective, because that’s just not what America is about. The pharmaceutical industry, also referred to as Big Pharma, has tried to hold back homeopathy, making claims against it. For example, Dr. Gerson claimed that a diet of fruits and vegetables could cure cancer. Pressure from multi-million dollar pharmaceutical companies however, led the NCI to dispute his claims. The biggest drug companies control the illnesses of the world and doctors are admitting that corporate healthcare is getting in the way of treatment. “Doctors say that they are frequently caught in a bind of choosing between practicing at the highest ethical level that puts their patients first and the relentless pressure to ratchet down costs. They say the difficulty is exacerbated by government regulations and insurance company contracts that micromanage their medical decisions. Six out of 10 say it is getting harder to adhere to the Hippocratic ethic of medicine, while only 2% say it is getting easier.” – Doctor Patient Medical Association Foundation Big Pharma has also caused the corruption of medical professionals, who take bribes and gifts by representatives illegally. Some say the responsibility for getting the truth out falls on the medical professionals. But how can they compete with the amount of money pharmaceutical companies spend on marketing. It makes up twice as much of what is spent on drug research. Medicine has also become too specialized. Figuring out a straight diagnosis from a healthcare physician can turn into a complicated who will only point you toward a different direction each time. And every time you get a step closer to finding out what is wrong,

SECTION TWO

and endless task that will have you visiting countless of specialists

you find out you have to refer to a different specialist, each time

spending money for an endless diagnosis. You may spend your entire life chasing a cure. Which raises the question –Are doctors held to less of a standard today or is insurance causing doctors to have to work differently? Hospitals will charge for every thing you touched, just to get their buck from the insurance. We are slaves to our medical structure and doctors who kill us with medical charges. Those who refuse to see the internal structure of the medical system have not fallen ill. The structure of authority has changed drastically. Patients no longer trust their doctors or their doctors’ diagnoses. Thanks to the Internet, patients now have new control of their own diagnosis, available in the comfort of their own home. With Google, people are able to search for their symptoms and self diagnose themselves with the latest disease using Web MD. This leads to the “Web MD effect” in which every citizen thinks they have a life threatening disease. But the public has been fed the idea of associating diseases to common problems. Big Pharma fabricates common nuisances into diseases that don’t exist. They medicate things that weren’t medical. They also sell old drugs as new drugs and new disorders. Most consumers have not even heard of Me Too drugs- drugs that are rebranded and re-sold at a more expensive price. These drugs generate profit by creating a cycle; doctors are hooked into selling the drug more often and patients are then hooked into requesting the drug more often. This is a cycle that pharmaceutical companies want and we tolerate this as a society because we want quick fixes

SECTION TWO

to our problems and because we are hypnotized by advertisements. Ads capture our interest because they create an emotional connection. We relate to them and so we strive to reach the fabricated perfections depicted. So how do we take control?

We can start by understand that medicinal ads are not doctors,

and should not be be used to diagnose you. Use caution on the Internet as well. Know that symptoms are not diagnoses, and if you have fears contact a doctor or specialist. Know that most medicine can be replaced with changes in diet, activity, mindset, and vitamins. Parents report that approximately 9.5% of children 4-17 years of age (5.4 million) have been diagnosed with ADHD as of 2007. The percentage of children with a parent-reported ADHD diagnosis increased by 22% between 2003 and 2007. Rates of ADHD diagnosis increased an average of 3% per year from 1997 to 2006 Boys (13.2%) were more likely than girls (5.6%) to have ever been diagnosed with ADHD. Rates of ADHD diagnosis increased at a greater rate among older teens as compared to younger children. The highest rates of parent-reported ADHD diagnosis were noted among children covered by Medicaid and multiracial children. -CDC

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

HOW TO ADMIRE A CELEBRITY Celebrities and media moguls are perhaps some of the most talked about individuals in our country. Often, they are revered higher than most of our politicians as role models and figures of authority on most topics. We follow them on Twitter, like them on Facebook, and religiously read and watch every step they take. To quote Uncle Ben “With great power comes great responsibility”. If American culture is so keen on following in the footsteps of its Hollywood A-listers, then celebrities need to realize how far their reach extends and are willing to make it count for something more than a gossipy headline. Thankfully, there are some moguls that stretch across the different realms of stardom who have already dug their toes into helping make a difference. When stardom is something closed off for certain few, the idea of the celebrity, wealth, beauty, and followers, is a dream many Americans wish for. Our culture has made these material things we should not base our actions on what others do, fickleness has seeped into our mainstream culture and some Hollywood starlets are focused on reinventing what the “celebrities” are known for.

SECTION TWO

a focus that in the long run do not really account for much. While

Hollywood celebrities, Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield, know how to use their fame as they took advantage of paparazzi outside a restaurant they were at to promote two charities/causes that they are passionate about. This is the type of positive reinforcement that can be used to spread more then just fame but the awareness of people in crisis around a community.

SEACREST STUDIOS Everyones favorite American Idol host, Ryan Seacrest, helps build radio and media stations in childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hospitals. In an effort to foster their curiosity and exploration of the entertainment and media industries. He and other superstars stop in from time to time to teach lessons about the industry and co-host broadcasts with the kids.

JAMIE OLIVER: FOOD REVOLUTION One of the biggest things about Americans is their appetite for the fried, fast, and frozen. Jamie Oliver, a renowned British chef, had decided he could not sit idly by as our dietary choices shorten lifespans. He created a Food Revolution that will flourish the habits of healthy eating, intended for all ages, that also has a partner program in schools as well. His partner program focuses on teaching kids gardening, healthy eating habits, and how to

SECTION TWO

help their families eat consciously too.

SECTION TWO

CHAPTER

digital revolution The Changing Face Of Music

In the late nineties, the idea of downloading music wasn’t on many people’s minds— “It wasn’t as easy as you kids have it today,” is what we’d say to our grandchildren. At the time, downloading music was a scavenger hunt. People had to track down songs, usually leading to shady sites with broken links. Shawn Fanning, a 19-year-old freshman at Northeastern University in Boston recognized the wild goose chase people had to embark on. He decided to try and create a solution. He started writing a program that simply collected all of these websites in one place, allowing music hunters to peruse through files with ease. Still in the early stages, he decided to share his idea in a chat room. The response wasn’t what he had hoped for. Most of the people just dismissed his concept, ridiculing its nature—that is, except for 18-year-old Sean Parker, a budding entrepreneur. They quickly bonded on their desire to create more than just another program; That “thing” was Napster.

SECTION TWO

they wanted to create something with a wide cultural importance.

Imagine: you’ve spent your life buying music and just out of nowhere, someone tears down the walls, giving you access to millions of songs—yes, illegally; but also free. The amount of content that suddenly became available was game changing, and people took notice. A year after its 1999 release, the Napster community had grown to over 20 million, and by the summer of 2000, around 14,000 songs were being downloaded per minute. This ushered an exciting new era for music fans, but not everyone was pleased. The dip in international sale figures caused the music industry to take notice. The Big Five took legal action. “The Big Five” was what the major labels were referred to: BMG, EMI, Sony, Universal, and Warner—think of it as a sort of Justice League or Avengers, only more hard-headed and wearing less spandex. Immediately, copyright infringement cases were brought against individuals, as well as Napster itself, and in 2001, the court ruled in favor of the Big Five. According to the court, Napster “knowingly encourages and assists its users to infringe the record companies’ copyrights.” They were given a choice: either start charging for the use of the service, or abandon it completely. Napster shook the music business, and quickly two camps emerged. There were people who were against it—and they had every right to be. The labels’, and maybe more importantly, musicians’ content was being illegally stolen right in front of them; SECTION TWO

Dr. Dre and Metallica were two huge figures in this protest against piracy. At the same time, not all musicians saw Napster as a terrible thing. It created a culture where people were actively seeking out new music. Wyclef Jean completely supported this idea, simply

wishing for his music to be heard. Chuck D of Public Enemy

100

was also in this camp, calling file-sharing “the new radio”. Well known publications were even on board, recognized this exciting advancement; TIME magazine went as far as placing Napsters’ impact on the same level of importance as email and instant messaging. The record companies had no idea of what was about to come. If they had simply taken the money out of the equation and stopped viewing Napster as music’s Y2K, they would have seen the new opportunities that were being made by the digital format. After the copyright infringement case, Napster began losing its luster, attempting to revitalize it to no avail. But eventually, a new application was released, called iTunes. Even though Napster had created the foundation for the digital music market, it was not able to stay relevant. By 2006, digital downloads had become a staple, they had an estimated worth of $700 million, yet Napster had less than 1 million users left—a bit melancholic, isn’t it? Do not worry though, our heroes, Fanning and Parker, did not end up under a bridge with substance problems and strange peanut butter and mustard addictions. Fanning went on to create Rupture, a social networking service for gamers, which he ended up selling to Electronic Arts for 30 million. Parker continued his entrepreneurial endeavors, eventually jumping onto an up-andcoming project—something called “Facebook”. What has Parker been up to since then? Well, he recently helped bring another game-changer to our computer screens: Spotify. For those who are not familiar with the aforementioned Spotify, it is essentially the successor to Napster—now with 100% less legal consequences. In short: GET IT. NOW. You’re welcome. Don’t Thanks to our constant attachment to the Internet, streaming is now becoming the preferred method of music consumption—the

SECTION TWO

mention it. Spotify gives users free access to millions of albums.

same could be said for TV and Movies. Again, fans were extremely

101

happy with this new model; and again, record companies were worried—see the pattern here? The reason why this worried so many in the industry, is that even though streaming services allow for more exposure, the royalty rates aren’t very high. For every 60 plays, the artist receives roughly 38 cents, which is then shared with the label, per contract. As you can see, it’s hard to believe this could be a viable source for profit. In a recent interview, Donald S. Passman, a top music lawyer and author of the book “All You Need to Know About the Music Business” defends streaming, saying “Artists didn’t make big money from CDs when they were introduced, either… They were a specialty thing, and had a lower royalty rate. Then, as it became mainstream, the royalties went up. And that’s what will happen here.” What he is saying is, as subscriber rates climb, royalty rates will follow. Streaming is already upstaging digital downloads. Around 175 million songs are bought per year, compared to approximately 7 billion streams of music. These numbers came from David Joseph, Chairman and CEO of Universal Music UK. He follows it up by stating that “the revenues are significantly growing and I fundamentally believe that streaming and subscription models with unlimited access on all devices are the future of our business.” Edgar Berger, president and CEO at Sony Music, is also pleased with the digital market: “At the beginning of the digital revolution, it was a common theme to say digital is killing music. Well the reality is, digital is saving music. I absolutely believe that this marks the start of a global growth story. The industry has every reason to be SECTION TWO

optimistic about its future.” Music sales saw a minimal gain in 2012, recording the first rise in revenue in 13 years, (according to figures from the International

Federation of the Phonographic Industry) Although it was just

102

a third of a percent, it’s the first increase since the peak of the industry in 1999—the same year Napster was released. So that’s it. The music industry is saved, right? Maybe. Things definitely seem to be headed on the right track. It’s so ironic: what was once considered to be the downfall of the music industry, has become the norm. The way we consume music has been reinvented, and it will keep changing. No matter what happens, we can count on it being exciting. If we have instant access to all of the world’s music now, what will come next?

SECTION TWO