A Long Day

One day inside of a long mission in the Zhari District of Kandahar, Afghanistan.

Gory, Gory What a Hell of a Way to Die!

“Sir… Sir they’re shooting at us.”
“Well shoot back.”

Almost any soldier who has been in a combat situation can relate to Black Hawk Down. For me though, it’s a special movie. I always feel silly when I tell people that it had a lot to do with me joining the Army, but it, in fact, did. I saw it in the theatre with three friends and midway through it I leaned over to one of them and said, “We should do this.” All three of us went to join the Army and were deployed to combat zones. Initially I just thought that it was a cool movie. Being a Ranger looked like the coolest most hardcore thing that a person could I was down. I probably watched that movie a hundred times before I ever shipped off to basic. I would watch it and get excited thinking about the extreme scenarios and situations that I might soon find myself in, and the crazy missions I would be conducting. What I saw then was an adventure movie. Of all the times I watched the movie before I went to combat I can honestly say that I never once “teared up”.

The movie that I see now that I’m out of the military and have done it all, isn’t the same movie that I saw then. It strikes me in a completely different way. I don’t see a bunch of young guys gearing up for a day of excitement, but rather a group of friends who just wanna get the mission over with, cracking jokes to hide their nervousness. I actually feel anxious when they’re in the birds on their way to conduct the raid. It’s the ending though, that truly gets to me now. I never understood before, the final two speeches at the end of the movie (the video clips that I have added). I just kind of thought they were sappy scenes to end the movie with. However, now I understand that those two scenes sum up the entire point of the movie, that war is hell and the only thing that keeps you going is your friends. I never understood that. Now I know exactly what the guys in these scenes and saying, and honestly, I got choked up when I was finding these clips.

Evil Media or Fair Business?

Is there such a thing as “pure media” anymore? Was there ever? After considerable time spent researching the topic, I’m inclined to say no. However, being an optimist, I’m hoping that I’m wrong about that. Are media conglomerates really as evil as everyone makes them about to be? Again, I’m inclined to say no. After all, is it really the sole responsibility of the media to ensure that the public is informed? Unfortunately I think the general public has misplaced trust in these institutions. Wasn’t it Michael Eisner of Walt Disney himself that said, “We have no obligation to make history. We have no obligation to make art. We have no obligation to make a statement. To make money is our only objective.”? A CEO can’t be any more honest about their company’s motives than that. This however, is where I find myself torn on the subject. As a capitalist and an American, I want to say, “What’s wrong with a company working in their own interest to make a profit?” I mean isn’t that one of the principles this country is founded upon? But another part of me thinks that, considering we’re the ones consuming the goods of these media conglomerates, they owe us something more; At least an unbiased opinion if nothing else. I don’t believe however, that there can ever be a clear solution to the problem of big media; the entire problem itself is far too complex. The only answer is government regulation on media. To me though, this isn’t much of a solution at all. In fact this seems counterproductive. At least as the media institutions exist today, flawed as they may be, they are able to give at least their view on any topic. In a government regulated, or controlled system you have the possibility of seeing even more biased views than already exist, or worse some stories or programs being cut completely. I wonder if the opponents of the mass media institutions have taken this possibility into account at all. No matter what happens on this subject in the future I don’t think people will any better or worse off. Even if government regulation occurs I believe that it will just change the form of the debate. For this reason I think people should just relax on this subject a bit, there are probably more worthy causes, with positive outcomes for people to devote their time to.

The Kids are Alright

As a parent myself, I admit that I haven't given a tremendous amount of thought to the appropriateness of the multitude of media content that my son is faced with. Of course, he's two, and isn't exactly trying to stay up late and catch the new episode of The Walking Dead (right now). For that matter, he doesn't understand the internet or technology in general. He thinks the sole purpose of the iPad is to download Elmo's World. He still doesn't understand why the "big TV" is ever tuned to anything besides Sesame Street. At this age I'm not sure there is much to worry about in the form of media exposure on him. I know that someday soon all of this will change though. Monitoring my child will be completely different from when I was a child. I didn't grow up with a computer in my house. The only media exposure my parents had to worry with was basic cable. It makes me wonder what new parents, or rather "newish" parents, are doing to monitor their children.
My sister has an 11 year old step-son that she has been helping to raise since he was 7. I figured that since we have completely conflicting ideologies, she would be an interesting person to give me some perspective on this topic. She told me that she heavily monitors what her step-son watches on TV. He has his own TV in his bedroom...however; the parental controls are activated on it. He isn't allowed to watch anything rated TV13 or higher. She said did tell me that sometimes exceptions are made, but if this is case he must watch with my sister and his father. He isn't allowed to use the internet unless an adult is in the room, and even then he's only allowed to visit "family-friendly" gaming websites. My sister told me that lately he has wanted X-Box Live. Apparently, they told him absolutely not, and said that the issue wouldn't be readdressed until he turned 13. She said the reason for this was that they wouldn't be able to sensor or monitor what was being said by other players. I found the whole x-box situation to particularly interesting, because they monitor everything else so intensely, yet he's allowed to play any video game he wants, regardless of content.
When I asked about positive media content, she and I had a bit of a disagreement. She said she believes the shows on the Disney Channel, which are aimed towards his age demographic, are positive. I disagree. I think those shows are no different from the garbage that adults waste hours of their time watching. There is definitely something more positive than watching those shows that children can be doing to better themselves. That, bettering ourselves, should be the goal of every person, period... especially parents.

I digress, as you see; though the subject of media and children can be a touchy one, it's one that should be addressed. It's especially important now that media is everywhere and that exposure to its content is almost constant. As for parental discretion though, obviously the choice as to what their children can view is theirs alone. I think no matter what, as long as questionable topics are addressed and concern shown, the children will continue to be alright.

The Dark Side of Digital

I'm sure at one time or another we have all stopped and thought about what technology has done for us. We have all marveled at our cell phone capabilities or a new video game system and the crazy functions that it's able to perform. Now, in our digital world, it seems that we only thrive if we have the most modern and fastest of technologies at our fingers. Have you ever stopped to think though; about what being connected is doing to us as a culture, the dark side of digital?

Today we are more connected than any group or civilization has ever been. Perhaps a more appropriate way of saying that would be, "today we have the ability to be more connected", because it seems that even though we have this connection that there is a fundamental disconnect. People don't seem to talk to one another anymore. That is to say that people don't seem to carry on conversation anymore. Now it seems that each of us exists within our own little world, and anyone not stored somewhere in our contacts isn't part of that world.

What about the effect that all of these "digital distractions" are having on our young children? In my Communications class, we recently viewed the documentary "Digital Nation", and I believe that it brought up both relevant questions and good points concerning the younger generations. One such question was, "is the brain capable of handling, on a daily basis, all of the information it receives from multiple media outlets?" Most people would say yes, but all studies point to the contrary. Young people are spending an average of 50+ hours per week with digital media. We have only recently begun to see the effects of this. The movie gave an example of teens in South Korea going to "technology rehab" centers, and recently read an article about sleep texting, and sleep emailing. Really, this is now recognized as a true medical condition, similar to sleep walking or apnea. Doctors say that this new condition is caused from the stress of having too much to do during our waking lives. One Doctor explains, "People are doing so much during a normal day that it can mean that they feel like they're "on call" even at night, because it's so easy to receive emails constantly, and get notifications from smartphones, it becomes more difficult for us to separate our waking and sleeping lives."

The world seems to be moving at a much faster pace now, and instant gratification seems to be the preference of everyone. The video at the beginning of this blog is David Fricke, Senior Editor of "Rolling Stone". I'm inclined to believe the same as he does, that people don't stop to really enjoy things anymore, that everything is done in a rush, or at least with a sense of urgency. I Hope in the future we learn to slow things down, and once again discover the art of conversation.

Predictive Profiling

Predictive profiling is one of the skills that I was trained in while in the Army. I was trained by Israeli GSS. I'm a pretty useful person to be with at the airport... or annoying, depending on your level of paranoia. I know that when I look at somebody now, I don't look at them the way that someone else probably does. Who knows though? Maybe I do. Actually, regardless of training, I'm sure that I do. To some degree I think that we all have our stereotypes and categories that, upon seeing or meeting someone we, at least initially, lump them into. Take this guy for example:

Is that a gilligan hat? I truly didn't know people still wore those. Obviously with this guy the first thing that I notice is his attire. Look at it - it's a little quirky. I would think that he tries too hard. He also probably still listens to Cypress Hill and goes to the same three bars that he's been going to since he was 18. Based on his posture and facial expression I also get the impression that he thinks he's kind of a tough guy. I think I'm gonna have to beat this guy up.
Or how bout this girl:

Wow. That's truly all I can say. I really don't want to go too in depth with this one because I'm afraid I'll find myself with those boots wrapped around my neck as this girl tries to drink my blood.

Sorry if this picture offends anyone. Observe this guy. I'm gonna assume he's poorly educated, drives a truck that's at least 30 years old, watches way too much Nascar, and is overtly racist. What is truly sad about this photo is that this is a candid shot. That means whoever took this photo had time to witness what was going on, PROCESS it, pull out their phone and snap this photo. God knows what he's at that pharmacy for.

Here we have the frat boys. These guys love having a good time. Nothing wrong with that. They will go onto graduate and contribute to society. Some will go on to do great things. Others will develop a cocaine habit.

Ah, alas we have the hipsters. These are the young people who live in small towns with nothing to offer so they make their pilgrimmage to the city. They wear oversized glasses, smoke cigarettes, and only drink coffee and microbrew.

Well, there you have it. Who knew stereotypes could be so much fun?! On a serious note though, I didn't realize how stereotypical I could be. Making judgements about the people in these pictures was way too easy for me. Maybe I should turn the camera on myself, put my pic out there and see what snap judements people would make about me.

I Am a Foreigner

I am a Digital Native. No, actually I am not. I can barely turn on my computer and sadly, I still look at the keys when I type. Though if you asked Mark Prensky, author of "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants" , he would tell you that simply based on my year of birth, I am. Again, I disagree. Prensky's model is far too black and white, too in or out for me to accept. It is almost as though he thinks that just because one is born in this "digital" age, that person is born with an innate knowledge of modern technology. When talking about the modern student Prensky says, "Our students today are all “native speakers” of the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet." Really? All native speakers? I don't think I even used google until 2006, and I still do NOT have a facebook account. Now, I'm not naive or ignorant to the fact that there are outliers in every group or exceptions to every rule, which I may be in this case, however I don't think that Prensky left any room for exceptions in his model.

In Henry Jenkins's "Reconsidering Digital Immigrants" , he identifies and refutes the generalizations made by Prensky. Jenkins makes some excellent points, especially in reference to "digital immigrants", saying:

Digital immigrants are being defined by what they lack with cultural difference seen as an obstacle they must overcome if they are going to fully assimilate into the modern age.

Digital immigrants are seen as imposing old world standards on the inhabitants of a new world and of getting in the way of their sons and daughter's opportunities to achieve.

Keep in mind what a high portion of the folks working in Silicon Valley today are immigrants -- information workers from around the world whose expertise and mastery over these new technologies are allowing American companies to succeed. So, real digital immigrants can probably outcompute most of the so-called digital natives.

Among the most important Jenkins raises though, is what these terms imply with the relationship between young and old. He says:

"Talking about digital natives and digital immigrants tends to exagerate the gaps between adults, seen as fumbling and hopelessly out of touch, and youth, seen as masterful. It invites us to see contemporary youth as feral, cut off from all adult influences, inhabiting a world where adults sound like the parents in the old Peanuts cartoons -- whah, whah, whah, whah -- rather than having anything meaningful to say to their offspring. In the process, it disempowers adults, encouraging them to feel helpless, and thus justifying their decision not to know and not to care what happens to young people as they move into the on-line world."

I believe this exageration of the generational gaps to be the biggest flaw of Prensky's model. It not only makes adults feel "disempowered" or "helpless", but also potentially creates a gap within the individual generations themselves. Like Jenkins, I believe these metaphors are doing more harm than good, making those "digital immigrants" feel more like outsiders and that understanding information in this age is an innate skillset that they were born without.