Boing Boing- A critique!

The discovery of weblogs or blogs has developed into one of the foremost mass-communication outlet globally. The weblog provides access for nearly any individual, from almost anywhere on the planet by means of a wide range of computers and computer like devices. Due to this remarkable discovery, people around the world have utilized the weblogs as an alternative method to share information and opinions .In this critique, I shall look at the blog ‘Boing Boing: A Directory of Wonderful Things’ to provide an insightful analysis on why this blog is important to me and to the wider community. '

‘Boing Boing: A Directory of Wonderful Things’ is created on January, 2000 by Mark Frauenfelder. The content of this blog focused on different themes. However, it revolves mostly around technology, futurism, gadgets and politics. With different themes audiences are able to have different range of choices with the provided information. What’s more, this website is closely affiliated with Google, the most popular search engine in the world.

so why do I choose this blog?

I have always been fascinated with the development of technology these days. By reading this blog I find myself connected to the world and not outdated. It is interesting to note that every entry of this blog is written daily. As a result, audiences around the world are able to view the blog daily and not read the same materials. Some of the entries that are written in this blog are expressed with brevity and clarity. This makes the blog easily readable and not mind-numbing. Additionally, every entry of this blog is equipped with links to intellectual websites that provides more concrete details on certain product spec. For some entries there are also videos to view and newspaper articles to read. Personally, I believe that by having these additional features it will enhances interactivity with the viewers.

The blog site, ‘Boing Boing: A Directory of Wonderful Things’ has managed to be the no. 1 most favorite site in Technorati.com. It has also won the Lifetime Achievement and Best Group Blog awards at the 2006 Bloggies ceremony. Furthermore, the site has managed to gained as much as 6.788.626 viewers each month. It is a remarkable number and it just proves the point that everyone else in the world is having a wonderful time tuning to this blog site.

FOX news..is it fair and balance?

A growing section of the world’s media is now privately owned. It has been suggested that there is a fundamental contradiction between the ideal that public media should operate as a public sphere and the reality concentrated in private ownership. Arguably, once the media is privately owned it creates fear that there will be restrictions of information and biasness in disseminating news. These long standing worries have been reinforced in recent years by the emergence of a particular news channel, the Fox News.

In October 1996, right wing American-Australian media conglomerate, Rupert Murdoch announced the launch of Fox news. Today, Fox news has gone to air with approximately 85 millions viewers in the United State. Murdoch proudly publicizes his news channel to be ‘fair and balanced’. However critics saw distortion in Murdoch’s slogan. Ideally, the principal role of a democratic media is to act as a check on the state. According to Curran (2000), the media should be the voice of the people in monitoring the full range of state activity and fearlessly expose abuses of official authority. However, Shawcross (1993) argues that: ‘Murdoch has always been willing to rein in his ideological commitment to his viewers in order to gain regulatory favors from politicians to conform to state-imposed impartiality rules or to woo audiences… Rupert steadfast determination is to promote, wherever possible, right wing values ‘

Due to the right wing perspective of capitalism and being as an entrepreneur, Murdoch views his media empire to be a profit centered business. To further illustrate this, the media also provide a channel of communication between government and the governed. This is to help the society to clarify its objectives, formulate policy and manage itself (Curran, 2000). However, instead of giving politicians with fair and plural representation, Murdoch will only favor politicians whom he thinks can give him advantages (Minehan, 2006). Murdoch fails to embody the ideal principal of a democratic media because he put the needs of profit before democracy.

In the United States, Fox news supported the current American President, George Bush in the invasion of Iraq to put an end to Sadam Hussein’s regime in 2003. According to Minehan (2006), Murdoch’s reward was that fox news reporters would be the first to arrive in Baghdad and was provided with protection from the US military. However, the grand slam was after the Iraq war Murdoch was granted the permission to buy DirecTv, the biggest satellite broadcaster in the United State. By doing this, Murdoch would emerge at the head of a global media empire and is valued at more than US$110 billions. According to Chenoweth (2001):
‘When joined to Sky Global (Murdoch’s satellite broadcaster in Asia) Murdoch satellite platforms would stretch seamlessly from North to South America, to Europe, across central Asia, China and Japan, down to Australia’ (p. xi). This means that Murdoch controls his own world highway, with a global voice and power that no one in history has ever had (ibid.).

It is appalling to witness the misuse of power in the media world. Ken Auletta (1995) one of the correspondent in the PBS (American public television) broadcast of, Who’s Afraid of Rupert Murdoch’, commented that ‘Murdoch is one most admired in a businessman-- bold, decisive, and willing to take the long view. But he is feared because what he produces can be viewed as toxic to our culture and our democracy’. Rupert Murdoch may as well be the most successful capitalist and the head of a global media empire. However, his claims that Fox News is fair and balanced has been untrue. Based on the facts stated in the above it can be seen that the news presented to the world by Rupert Murdoch are partial, influenced and biased. Without a doubt Rupert Murdoch is a brilliant entrepreneur but his means is unquestionably anything but fair and balanced.

References:

Chenoweth, N. 2001. Virtual Murdoch: reality wars on the information highway, Secker and Warburg, London

Curran, J & Gurevitch, M (Ed.) 2000. Mass Media and Society. (3rd ed.). Arnold: London

Minehan, M. 2006, “Rupert Murdoch” Presentation, Insearch, date accessed 19.11.06

Celebrity Craze: why is here to stay?

Due to the help of public relations and advertisement, Celebrity has become a prevalent feature in the mass media. How disappointing though, once upon a time celebrities such as Grace Kelly are deem to be renowned and graceful. Today it’s just about determining who has the bigger tits or the trashiest…

Have you ever wondered why there is an obsession in society when it comes to celebrities?

Simple reasons I guess…

1. Celebrities are categorised as the people most ordinary citizen aspire to become (we want to be “them”) ;
2. Celebrities seem to be the group of people who are “living” the dreams of ordinary people.
3. Consumers like to see celebrities weaknesses and downfalls

Moreover… viewers today failed to distinguish between reality and fantasy. We like to be caught in the moments and say…’if only?’

Now don’t get me wrong I admire some of the celebrities around…Jodie Foster, a Yale graduateor James Wood who graduated from MIT. I guess to me beauty must come with brains. Today’s celebrity craze is just about beauty and body…I wonder sometimes; doesn’t celebrity have a moral responsibility to the viewer?

Playboy Stirs conflict in Indonesia..

Media texts help to define our world and show the appropriate societal behavior and attitudes. However, the scope of media coverage today has been so frequently misunderstood and misinterpreted as ‘mindless trash’. It has been suggested that most media products these days are deemed to be more fixated with the sensationalism of ‘sexual cultures’.

The publication of Playboy magazine in Indonesia provides a sensational and controversial case study on ideological debates surrounding cultural and political issues. Playboy is an American adult entertainment magazine, founded in 1953 by Hugh Hefner. The magazines are published monthly and feature photographs of nude women, along with various articles on fashion, sports, consumer goods and public figures. In addition, Playboy magazines also publish short fiction by top literature writers. Playboy promotes freedom of speech as the magazine has been known to express liberal opinions on most major political issues. Hefner notes that, ‘I wanted to publish a magazine that influenced and reflected on the importance of individual, on his rights and opportunities in a free society.

In Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim-majority country, Muslims struggle to reconcile radically different sets of social norms and laws, including those derived from Islam, local social norms, and contemporary ideas about gender equality and rule of law. Ideally, Indonesia adopted similar ideologies of a democratic society. However, ideal systems are also an abstract ideal, and in practice, conflicting ideologies do occur.

The Playboy magazines in Indonesia that are published locally by PT. Velvet Silver Media is deemed by the majority of Indonesian radical Muslim leaders (Islam Defender Front) to contain derogatory and degrading pornographic images that could damage the moral fiber of the nation (The Jakarta Post, 9 June 2006). As a result, violent demonstrations occurred to oppose to the idea of turning woman into a sex object. Taufiqurrahman (2006) noted that a day after the first edition of Playboy Indonesia hit newsstands; a throng of Islam Defenders Front (FPI) supporters violently ransacked and burned the editorial office of the magazine in South Jakarta, forcing all staffers to flee. Ironically, these violent outbursts resulted in free publication for the magazine.

In general, the content of Playboy Indonesia is far less provocative than that carried in many other local men’s magazine. According to Ponti Carolus, director of license-holder PT Velvet Silver Media, "(We) will not make women objects and we'll strive to be accepted by women," Ponti said. "Our concept is world-class journalism and lifestyle. We will have a greater emphasis on the literary qualities” (2006, cited in Playboy Indonesia, June 2006). The second edition of Playboy Indonesia is not only free of steamy nude pictorials, but also conspicuously lacking in advertisements. White space occupied the pages where the glossy advertisements that filled April's first edition should have been placed. "These blank pages are dedicated to our loyal clients who have been threatened against placing ads in this magazine," is the message from publisher PT Velvet Silver Media on the blank pages, acknowledging unnamed cell phone, cologne and tobacco advertisers (Playboy Indonesia, June 2006).

Even though, the local adaptation of Playboy Indonesia carries no nudity and instead delves into much more literary subjects, small but noisy groups of Muslim protesters have sought to outlaw it simply because, in their view, the name Playboy is synonymous with obscenity.

I guess the problem is that these people said they were against pornography, when they're not. They're against the name Playboy, the brand. A brand so powerful that it has scared them half to death or moved them to anger. This explains a lot. How intellectually shallow we are, how our society always looks at what's on the surface and doesn't bother to examine what's inside. Regardless, the publication of Playboy magazine in Indonesia exemplifies sexually controversial ideologies in the contemporary media, which stir many disreputable arguments. Ideologies are in fact not neutral and on this view, Indonesian Muslim cultures are continuously involved in constant struggles between competing ideological codes.

Pet Craze leads to Genetic Deffect!

Today, in a world of modern technology scientists has experienced a major breakthrough in exploring the study of genetics. Genetics, by definition, determines much (but not all) of the appearance and action of a certain organisms (wikipedia, 2006).

In Japan, the genetic technology is available to create the perfect pet for you. According to the New York Times (26/12/2006), you can make a poodle in a size of a teacup and it can fit in your purse or what about having a Chihuahua with blue eyes. Anything is possible with the right amount of money. To create your personalised dog you have to be willing to spend an amount of money, starting from $10.000.



However, it has been reported that with this new invention of technology there have been dogs with brain disorders so severe that they spent all day running in circles, and others with bones so frail they dissolved in their bodies. Many carry hidden diseases that crop up years later.

I am fascinated with the speed of technology in this 21st century. Nowadays, although, it still frowned upon, the study of genetics can also be implemented to create the perfect child. If you were Asian you are able to personalise your baby into having blond hair and blue eyes. It all sound so amazing.

What struck me by this news is that humans are capable to do countless of wonderful things but all of that has been useless due to money-oriented perspective. Societies today are so busy with creating the things that we 'want' rather than having to create the things that we 'need'. As much as I am intrigue with the many astounding things science can do I can’t help but to think when will society going to stop playing GOD and be happy with the things that we have.

Fashion SENSE

Nowadays, it is very common for students to show off their so-called 'wealth' in the university. They go to school in their best clothes and branded shoes. Hence, the campus has become a place of fashion statement more than anything. Many have forgotten that the university is really a place for us to pursue tertiary education.

Have you ever considered why it is a must for primary and secondary students to wear uniform? I suppose it is because they want to minimize class conflict. By generalizing all the students by making them to wear uniforms it makes the wealthy and the less privileged less distinguishable. They understand that the school is primarily a place to learn.

Now, why is it the university allows their students to wear their day-to-day clothes? It is because university students are regarded as adults and hence they can act responsibly. Does this change the fact that the university is still a place to study? The answer is no. Regardless, many go to campus today with the intention of showing off. They wear their best threads only to look good in front of their friends. However, the university is not the place or time to do that. What it does is only creating different classes, the wealthy and the less privileged. It is no mystery why some students are alienated because they are not considered ‘well-off’.

I personally believe that you have to look presentable and acceptable. Of course different places have different definitions of ‘presentable and acceptable’ attire. For example, many regard students who wear their clubbing-clothes to school are frown upon. As an adult we should have the ability to categorize our clothes so that we do not be ignorant and create unnecessary classes, or worse attract the wrong attention.

I believe it is okay to wear your best clothes to school only and only if you do it in the spirit of looking presentable and not to show off. It’s true we should wear ‘what we want when we feel like it’. It is important to be true to ourselves. However EVERYTHING has the time and place for it. After all, one distinction that differentiates between a child and an adult is their decision making.

Pole Dancing! the new exercise..

Keeping fit is one of the two most common words in a woman's dictionary. Today, the health industries have come up with many new and improve exercise programs that are interactive and gratifying. Now, exercising is NOT just only about treadmills, aerobics or sits ups, it is about endurance, coordination and last but not least…sensuality.


Recently, pole dancing has become an increasingly popular form of exercise, in which women (and sometimes men) use the pole as a workout prop. This is because; Pole dancing offers the capacity to be sensual as well as simultaneously increases the upper body strength. However, the term pole dancing has been rendered pejorative as it is usually connoted with the word striptease. As a result, some women find this activity to be offensive. An article in the recent BBC website said that 'The phrase pole dancing conjures up images of seedy strip clubs and women dancing for money'.

However, polestar Australia, an industry that offer pole dancing lessons said that:
'Pole dancing is a lot more strenuous than it looks:a good session on the pole can burn more calories than a good session in the gym and will certainly provide more muscle tone. Some moves are trickier than others and may take a while to master-but this is the aim of the class.'

The pole dancing exercise focus more on toning the body rather than just learning a skill to seduce men. It is more artistic than sleazy. According to Fitness First Australia over at Bondi Junction; 'The pole section develops endurance, strength, power, stamina, and mobility, especially in the upper body areas. The calories burn and the girls will rapidly see improved muscle tone.'

Pole dancing consists of many elements such as tricks, spins, poses, linking moves and floor working. The muscles that are being trained are of the arms, shoulders, and the torso region. This is to maintain good control, stability, balance and posture.

I have always been intrigue with the art of pole dancing. I think it is the combination of high heels, personal balance and eroticism. Yum! Definitely a sport to try!

Barack Obama- The New American Hero?

U.S Senator Barack Obama has become the new American Political Phenomenon. During his 2006 congressional election, he charmed the nation into believing that he is the perfect candidate for the 2008 presidential election. Just recently, the senator appeared in Oprah sharing his vision for the better future of America, he was calm, collected, funny and sincere- a true gentleman. Newsweek magazine calls Senator Obama "a political phenomenon unlike any previously seen on the American scene."



After reading much about the senator, I must say that his achiements in life is astounding, by 22 he graduated from Columbia University and by 30 he graduated from Harvard Law. Today, he just finished writing his second book, The Audacity of Hope, which ostensibly predicted to be the next international best seller. A proud Christian father of two, his image portray a true wholesome American family.

However, as impressed as I am with Obama, I can't help but wonder, are the Americans so desperate for a hero that they are looking to create a president out of a first term senator? a reader from Time Magazine (October 2006 issue) commented that ' I fear Obama would be this generation Jimmy carter, a man whose humility we appreciate and whose inexperience we're willing to overlook simply because we desire a change from the lies and arrogance of his immediate predecessors. The presidency is no place for on-the-job training'. I was jolted by this comment and for a split second I too, doubted the senator.

Having raised in Indonesia most of my life I have experienced first hand the impact of bad government. After the Suharto regime there have been many unrest and major economy slump. Since then, there have been strings of Indonesian presidents who tried to rise to the occasion. However, they have not been able to amend the nation. My point is, if the nation has lost its faith on one president, the next successor will have a bigger burden in terms of gaining the nation's trust.

Some say that, Bush Presidential campaign is a dissapointement. Eventhough, Senator Barack Obama has exuberant charisma and the capability to be the next American Hero but is he the right person at the wrong time?

Borat- the movie..

The man that we know as Ali G has create a new shameless comedy about being a journalist from Kazakhstan. He has a peculiar sense of humour but offensively entertaining. Love it or hate it, this is a must see movie of 2006.

"Beauty is a curse on the world. It keeps us from seeing who the real monsters are." or is it?

On 24th of October 2006, Australia's television current affairs programme on channel nine network has raised a stirring arguement in regards to the creation of 'the beautiful people' website in Denmark. 'The beautiful people' network is being critize because of their policy in accepting members, which is IF YOU'RE UGLY DON'T APPLY. What is interesting about this story is the harsh comments made by some people. For example, Madison editor Paula Joye deems this concept to be 'borderline sadistic and masochistic and really revolting'. Furthermore, she continues by saying that ’the whole website has been devoted to something so superficial and so shallow'. Ironically, if you look at her picture it seems that she also value the notion of beauty or else why would she be wearing make up and making herself looking presentable in the public eyes? Doesn't that make her shallow & superficial as well? WE CAN'T DENY that the society today is more fixated with the sensationalism of beauty more than ever.

Hugh hefner once said that 'a hypocritical society is an unhealthy society'. In truth, whether we like it or not, we can't escape the notion of beauty. We care how others perceive our image. At first sight, we all know that people don't judge you by your personality, they can't see what's underneath, we see the exterior first. Perhaps the comments posted by some members in the beautiful people network are rude towards the the ordinary and the ugly but it is their honest opinions. I believe people can excel in different things if they don't have beauty they can pursue other things, like a degree or sports, etc. After all beauty will fade in time but knowledge last forever. I guess what I am trying to say is that let people have their say...People who posted their picture in the beautiful network are fully aware of the risks and consequences. In my opinion we should respect the comments made by the beautiful people because maybe beauty is the ONLY THING they have. Don't blame the creator of the website but blame the society that we are living in. After all if an international artist, such as MARILYN MANSON can write a song dicriminating the 'beautiful people', why can't the 'beautiful people' express their opinion?

What is it all about....

After much consideration, I have decided that the theme of my blog will be all the stories or events that puzzles and challange my inquisitive nature. This will be a written work that encompasses a wide range of topic from serious matters of political affairs to stories of little substance and significance, such as, celebrity gossip, fetishes, etc...

I have a different perspective everyday and it usually depends on my mood. Some days I will provide wise, insighful and intelligent opinions & other days it will seem that I am sharing my views straight from my ass (my comments or opinions can be cynical, superficial, bias, sexist, sarcastic or irrelevant). Furthermore, Parental advisory for reader under the age of 18 is necessary.

Please feel free to voice your comments, opinions or suggestions.