Blog Assignment #8

Memento has become one of the most popular films of the past twenty years. Countless films and other mass media have mimicked and imitated its style. This enduring legacy and popularity stems largely from its unique narrative sequence. Presented in two color structures — black and white and color — the film goes back and forth between the past and the present in both chronological and reverse chronological order.

Memento is the story of Leonard who suffers from a type of short term memory loss known as anterograde amnesia. His wife has been raped and murdered and he is on a quest to find the perpetrator he believes got away. While Leonard was present during the attack, he was injured and this trauma resulted in his amnesia. Due to his condition, he must constantly write himself notes — even going so far as to tattoo the notes onto himself — in order to remember anything and track down his wife’s murderer.

The movie’s sequence is not entirely chronological. The episodes from the past (before the start of the film), are shown in color, while the episodes from the present are shown in black and white. These scenes alternate until they meet during the events from the beginning of the film. This unorthodox narration allows the viewer to step inside the inner workings of Leonard’s mind. The viewer, too, has amnesia and must piece together the snapshots of events just as the character must.

It is this presentation of the story that I believe is the key to the film’s success. If told in the “normal” way that most stories are (chronologically), the film wouldn’t evoke the same type of emotion and feeling. The viewer is not omnipotent; he or she does not know anything that Leonard does not. The viewer is seeing the film and its events in the same way that Leonard is perceiving his life. It is not until the end of the film, when the two time sequences meet, that the viewer becomes more aware than Leonard. If the film were not told in this way, this ending would be no surprise. It would lose its status as a thriller and suspense story.

This being said, while I believe that the film was fascinating and thrilling, keeping me on my toes and eager to find out what came next, I also believe that without this narrative structure, I would have been bored. It is this narrative structure that makes the movie. It is not the story, but how the story is told, that keeps the movie interesting. Taking the same characters, the same plot, and putting it in a traditional order would amount to an okay film, but nothing more than that. It appears that Christopher Nolan (the film’s director) is intending for the audience to be confused. It is this confusion that peeks the viewers interested and keeps him or her glued to the screen. “What just happened? Who is that? Was that what I think it was?” are questions that I myself asked while viewing the movie the first time years ago. I will admit that I was hooked within the first several minutes. However, after watching the film again for this assignment (this being my second viewing), the confusion wasn’t there, and without the confusion, there was no magic. The thrill was gone. While, yes, this can be said of most movies that one has viewed several times, but after only a second viewing, I was surprised at my lack of interest in the narrative compared to my interest during my first viewing. While it feels pretentious to call one of the most popular and greatly reviewed films of the 21^st century gimmicky, it can certainly feel that way after the glitter wears off.

Despite my personal feelings toward it, the film is nonetheless important in cinema and narration. Films like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind owe much to its storytelling. The NBC series Blindspot is also eerily similar to Leonard’s struggle (though I admit I have never watched the show and have only seen its trailer). Even Finding Dory, a children’s film about an anthropomorphic fish, bears resemblance to the movie, with its titular character suffering from the same short term memory loss as Leonard. As such, I would grade the movie as a B- for its uniqueness, creativity, and thrills, but also because, just like Leonard’s memory, its appeal fades with time.

Blog Assignment #5

The Daily Show, now hosted by comedian Trevor Noah, is a satirical and comedic news program on Comedy Central. The episode of The Daily Show that I watched was its most recent and aired Monday June 13^th. Its focus was mainly on the recent mass shooting in Orlando, Florida and the conversation around gun control. It had one other segment which was devoted to a contentious delegate race in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The episode ended, as it always does, with a “moment of Zen”. For this particular episode, the moment was of Lin-Manuel Miranda, creator of the musical Hamilton, and his acceptance speech at this year’s Tony Awards. In the speech, he spoke about the Orlando shooting.

Having watched The Daily Show for years, the format and comedy are very familiar to me. I began watching the show as a young teenager, around the age of 15 or 16, and, at the time, it was one of my only news sources. It provided the highlights (and even stories that were not being talked about on major news outlets), but it was still funny and entertaining. There would be musical guests, or interviews with celebrities, journalists, or even presidential candidates. It was also short, clocking in at only 30 minutes. A show about the news that was also witty, entertaining, and short was a winning combination able to keep the attention of a teenager. It also made me feel informed.

Despite being such a highly rated and entertaining show, The Daily Show has not been without its fair share of criticism. While many young audience members use The Daily Show as a news source, the premise of the show is still that of a comedy program. Even The Daily Show itself has argued that it is a “fake news” program (Peacock, 2015). But does the comedic nature of the show degrade the seriousness of the topics discussed by its host and correspondents? Can a comedic show like The Daily Show really talk about such heavy topics like the Orlando shooting? In my opinion, yes. Yes it can and it has.

The Daily Show has won countless awards, both for its comedy as well as its news. Even though the show has been described as “fake” news, Time argues that the jokes still mattered: “What [The Daily Show] did with comedy was a kind of journalism nonetheless, using satire and some thorough research of source material to analyze the news and analyze its analysis” (Poniewozik, 2015). Just because The Daily Show delivers the news in a way people pay attention to, and in a way that sparks laughter, shouldn’t categorize it as something other than news. It entertains while it informs and that blend brings in an audience that may have otherwise not been informed at all. In a 2009 Time poll, former Daily Show host Jon Stewart was ranked as the most trusted newscaster in America (Poniewozik, 2015).

The Daily Show has also spawned several other satirical news programs like Full Frontal with former Daily Show correspondent Samantha Bee, and Last Week Tonight with yet another former correspondent, John Oliver. These shows (and there are plenty more) prove that there is an audience for this type of programming — shows that inform, amuse, and educate. I believe this to be beneficial to society. Would we as a nation be informed without these shows? Of course — for years before the program aired, audiences sought information from various news outlets. However, I believe that younger audiences, or even audiences who also want entertainment, enjoy satirical news programs. They enjoy them and they watch them. They receive their news from them. This in itself makes the shows a beneficial addition to our society.

Works Cited

Peacock, C. (2015, September 01). Is The Daily Show's 'fake news' legitimate journalism? Retrieved June 14, 2016, from http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/mediawatch/audio/201768045/is-the-daily-show's-'fake-news'-legitimate-journalism

Poniewozik, J. (2015, February 10). Jon Stewart, the Fake Newsman Who Made a Real Difference. Retrieved June 14, 2016, from http://time.com/3704321/jon-stewart-daily-show-fake-news/

Blog Assignment #3

Trainor, M. (June/July 2016). Planning without my mom. Brides, 83 (3), p. 108-110.

As I am getting married this summer, the only magazine that I had readily available to me was Brides. My mom had bought it for me earlier in the month as a way to pass the time while I waited with her at various appointments. Because I was with my mom when I originally received the magazine, a specific article caught my eye. “Planning without My Mom” is a personal story about one woman’s experience planning a wedding without her mother who had passed away from breast cancer six years prior. Her relationship with her deceased mother, her best friend, and her father are examined in the brief piece, as well as the blossoming relationship with her now-husband. The author recounted how her husband helped her through dress fittings, hair appointments, and other bridal experiences that are traditionally reserved for the mother of the bride. She mentioned ways in which she incorporated her mother’s spirit in her wedding ceremony, including holding her mother’s blue rosary as her “something blue”.

I was deeply touched by the article and was glad for having read it. On a side panel incorporated on the same page as the article, the editors of the magazine included various ways brides and grooms can honor lost loved ones on their special day. Having not lost any close loved ones myself, these suggestions did not apply to me. Nevertheless, I found them to be informative for others who have lost dear family and friends.

After reading the article, I browsed through the rest of the magazine. Brides is a publication that is full of photos of gorgeous wedding gowns, bridesmaid dresses, tuxes, and more. Truly, it can feel like the magazine is more ad content than non-ad content. This being said, I counted only about 35 pages of advertisements that were not specifically wedding related. These ads were for items like deodorant, birth control, make-up, etc. and had printed the word “ADVERTISEMENT” on the top left hand corner of the page. This 35 page advertisement count in a 259 paged magazine would make 13.5% of the magazine ad-related content. However, as mentioned previously, Brides magazine has many pages devoted to wedding gowns and other bridal related imagery (like the image seen below) that are clearly ads for the designer. Taking these pages into account, about 200 pages of the 259 page magazine was ad-related content, accounting for 77% of the magazine’s overall content.

Brides magazine is specifically geared toward brides-to-be and so the amount of advertisements within its pages is not at all surprising to me. A bride-to-be myself, I am well aware of how expensive weddings are and how lucrative the wedding industry is. Wedding dresses, wedding rings, honeymoons, reception halls — these are all items couples feel the need to secure for their big day. With a countless number of magazines, shows, celebrity gossip, and even Pinterest content devoted to weddings, the want (and pressure) of having a fairy tale wedding is rather significant for brides and grooms alike. It is no wonder that Brides magazine fills its pages with mostly advertisements of these bridal elements. Brides-to-be will either spend the money to purchase a magazine like Brides, or, as my friends and I have often done, gather as many wedding related magazines together and sift through them without purchasing them. Whether or not the magazine is purchased, however, advertisers still have consumers willing to purchase items they have seen in the ads in order to have their wedding look just as in the magazine. In comparison to other magazines, I’m sure that Brides’ ratio of ads to articles is very high. Yet this does make sense to me given the bridal industry. 

Reaction to "Shifts and Changes"

The professor's short essay examines the virtual world of social media. Has it led to the death of critical thinking? Has intellectual thought been replaced with tweets and snapchats? Or could 140 characters and a selfie really provide critical reflection? 

This past fall semester, I read an article titled, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" by Nicholas Carr. Carr argues that the endless supply of information — whether scholarly or otherwise — that is available to us at the push of a button, is making us less likely to want to read longer pieces of writing. From my own personal experience, I believe this could be true. Even in my position as a content writer, I've learned that the shorter and more concise a Facebook post or even blog post is, the more reactions and reach it will receive. 

But does this mean we’re “stupid” now? Is concision less than wordiness? Does this mean that intellectual thought has all but disappeared or that critical thinking has become a “ghost”? I would suppose that would have to depend on what your ideas of intellectual thought and critical thinking are. Does an analysis have to be long-winded and overly developed in order to pass as scholarly? Does a philosophical debate have to be in a face-to-face meeting with romantic language or can it be in internet slang via a Reddit forum? The quote from Heraclitus about change may hold the answer. I believe that social media and the internet can provide critical thinking and intellectual reflection; how this is portrayed, however, will be different than in generations past.  (Here’s a wonderful example, I think.)

Introduction

Hello and welcome to my very first blog post for Mass Communication, summer 2016! My name is Brooke Fontoura and I am a senior at Kutztown University majoring in Communication Studies with a minor in New Media. I am also a "non-traditional" student which means I'm probably (read: most likely) older than many of my fellow students who will be reading this. I grew up in the '90's and I'll just leave it at that.

I am getting married this summer on August 12th which is both ridiculously exciting and even more stressful. I'm viewing this course as some much needed time away from wedding planning. I have a daughter who is wonderful and my own personal little cheerleader. We love to do yoga and other fun things together. Other random facts about me include: I am currently the content manager for an ethical fashion retailer called The Root Collective. We specialize in women's shoes that are handcrafted by makers in Guatemala. I am also an animal lover, a book nerd, and a vegan of many years.

I'm looking forward to learning more about mass communication in this super charged summer course!