David Lankford's Journal

My week’s on the media is a set of journal entries from Farnaz Fassihi, the Middle East correspondent for the Wall Street Journal, where she describes how she survives in Iraq. Her set of journal entries, which were published, raise the question, to what extent should a reporters opinion be put into a story? She talks about the reporters driver being scared driving down roads and incidents of surviving mortar attacks. Some of her friends cannot leave a certain mosque because the risk walking down sniper alley in old town Baghdad. She sees the ambushes, car bombs, and checkpoints and has gotten some luck herself in order to stay alive.
I think that her reports should not be censored. Just because it may not paint the correct or best picture that the government wants top show, does not mean that it should not be seen in its entirety. This is a very reliable source that is a small employee in a big name. The Wall Street Journal is a major news source, but the Middle East correspondent is only a small player in the organization. However, she is giving us some of the “real” news that is coming out of Iraq. We worry about the news leaning too far one way or the other, and she worries about surviving while working. She is living the reality and we should her what she has to say.
One thing that we should look for in this source is the type of entireties. Are they straight reporting or heavily opinionated. For example she says that she told a mosque that she could not turn off her cell phone in case of an emergency. While she was in the Mosque her boyfriend called her because he heard a report about a bombing. She identifies this a crisis, but some may not. She does have more valid reports such as the time when she was meeting with the former Interior Minister. He was talking to her about how well Democracy was doing when there building was hit in a mortar attack. All of her stories are fact based and I don’t think that she plants in her political or personal opinions when not necessary. I don’t think this is too biased and therefore not a problem.
This is a very useful source of information. We talk and argue about Iraq when we are a half a world away from it. We don’t see what every day decisions look like. We hear the reports of terrorist bombings, but we don’t see the after math. We don’t have to worry about getting hit with a rocket-propelled grenade on our way to work. This is the most reliable source I have seen come out of Iraq. I have seen a lot of reporters live from Iraq, but this was written for a news viewing audience. These were written in a personal journal style and therefore they look more personable. They don’t look like regular news flap, but it feels like your looking through her eyes and what she is seeing. This material is critical to anyone understanding the situation in Iraq. You have to get news from the source in order to base an opionion.

I watched the original Ocean’s Eleven with Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, and Sammy Davis Jr., for my critique this week. I found this version of the story to be very hard to follow. The nature of acting in the sixties was way over the top and looks cheesy compared to today’s movies. The first half of the movie is really boring, because it takes place in three rooms and involves about 5 actors talking on the phone, trying to get everyone in on the job. I thought they pulled off the recruiting scenes much better in the remake as they had Brad Pitt and George Clooney (who were Dean Marin and Frank Sinatra) actually travel to meet the motley crew. It was much more interesting than watching what seemed to be the same scene over and over again. It was also hard to follow because all eleven thieves looked the same. They wear the same style suit, have the same haircuts, and they’re all well to do businessmen except for the black garbage man (Sammy Davis Jr.). I don’t think this movie would fly in today’s world because there were some definite underlying racial issues. As I just said, ten of the eleven men were basically the same character. They were white, rich, handsome, and well to do. Sammy David proved to be the most important part of the plan, but it just seemed that the only place for a black man in this movie was in the role of the garbage man and that’s prejudice by today’s standard. Along the same line, in the movie Las Vegas only inhabited white people. There were no other races anywhere in any of the casinos. If you did see a minority they were employees or in some type of servant role. It tells the audience tat only rich, white people go to Vegas.

The remake flip-flopped the personalities of the two main characters. In the movie, Frank Sinatra plays Daniel Ocean and Dean Martin plays his right hand man. Sinatra is very flamboyant in his manner and does not fit the role of a decision maker or a leader. Dean Martin always has a stiff upper lip and is cool, clam, and collected. He seems to be the brain behind the heist. In the remake they made Daniel Ocean (George Clooney) more level headed and Martin’s character (Brad Pitt) more flamboyant and the center of attention.

I thought that the remake did a good job of staying to the original plot. The only that I didn’t like was the happy Hollywood ending that they glued over the original. The remake is more interesting because they use a wider range of characters. The remake kept the importance of Sammy Davis’ role, but changed the details. Don Cheadle plays more of technical guru instead of garbage man. He becomes one of the most important players because he is the one that knocks out the power and rigs the getaway van that diverts the police. The final dramatic sub plot is the story of the woman being with the wrong man. In the original it was a second tear character that was dealing with his mother remarrying an ex- con. In the remake it was of course Daniel Ocean’s ex-wife (Julia Roberts) who was with the scoundrel casino owner, that was the target for the robbery.

I love this story. I like the newer version probably because I’m more familiar with today’s style of acting. The plan for the robbery had to be much more complex in the remake since security measures are so much higher today. I actually couldn’t believe how easy it seemed to rob a casino from the original’s perspective. I won’t ruin the ending of the first but it definitely made the movie. It was much better than the happy ending of the second.

How would you feel if this year’s boat dance was not put on by the men’s rugby club but instead by The Bush/ Cheney or Kerry/ Edwards campaign? Would you pay more attention to what they were saying? All in all, would it affect your opinions more if they were advertising in our back yard instead of in mainstream television?

This is what is happening in several swing states in the last week of the campaign. Voters are being bombarded by television and radio ads, mailings, and telephone calls. The purpose of this is to “close the sell”, according to the OTM report. Paul Ingles, who was reporting from New Mexico, said that traffic reports within the state are now sponsored by the Bush/ Cheney campaign. Yes, the president is tossing in political attacks just after many people listen for the most recent accident and get an idea of how long it will take to get home. These messages are believed to be highly effective because people are very concentrated on what the traffic reporter is saying. Rick Frishman said that the ads are almost subliminal because it hard to distinguish the traffic reports from the advertisement because the reporter does not change the level of their voice. An example would be:

There is a two- car pile up just south of Las Cruces on the 188. Traffic will condense to one lane and will be slow for quite some time. This traffic report is brought to you by the Bush Cheney campaign that wants to remind you that one year after the September 11 attacks, John Kerry voted to slash intelligence by six billion, which would have compromised our nations defense.

Frishman also went on to say that the reporters themselves give more influence than the ads do themselves. People have been listening to these traffic reporters for twenty and thirty years in some cases. The people trust them and what they say because of the countless hours that they have saved by listening to their reports and thus avoiding problem areas. Kevin Madden, who works for the Bush campaign said that sponsoring such traffic reports is a unique and effective form of advertising. Not only are people stuck in traffic with no place to go, but also they’re in a situation where they are not expecting to hear political advertisements. This leads to the possibility that these people who are frustrated and upset, will not critique or even notice that they are hearing a pro- Bush or Anti- Kerry advertisement.

The Kerry campaign has not gone as far to sponsor traffic reports but they are getting many celebrity advertisements on talk radio. They are either using their time as a guest on a show to promote Senator Kerry (Sheryl Crow in Nevada, just recently) or they are doing PSA’s, which simply remind and encourage people to vote. However, don’t be fooled by this seemingly non- partisan ad. In the case of MTV, who encourages their fans to “rock the vote” they don’t want their fans to “rock” in any way they choose. All of the programming behind the slogan “rock the vote” highly favors Kerry and slams Bush with no regard. So even though they are saying “rock the vote”, it really means rock the vote for Kerry. This is also an effective strategy that plays into the Kerry campaign ideal, that if we can encourage enough people to vote, then enough of them will vote our way.

What position have all of these political ads and attacks put us in. The OTM report suggests that the onslaught of political advertisements may sour some voters into not voting at all. The overkill that people have faced in the swing states may cause some political fatigue or simply irritate people to the point where they choose to not vote at all. Bobby Box, who is a morning talk show host for an oldies station in New Mexico said, “It’s getting old, but what are we going to do?…It only happens every four years and then its gone and we don’t have to deal with it anymore…I think we can live with it a little longer.”

Well, I agree. Election years are very intense with political advertising, but shouldn’t they be? We are electing not only our president but also the most powerful man in the world. At least it will all be over by the time I give my presentation.

How would you feel if this year’s boat dance was not put on by the men’s rugby club but instead by The Bush/ Cheney or Kerry/ Edwards campaign? Would you pay more attention to what they were saying? All in all, would it affect your opinions more if they were advertising in our back yard instead of in mainstream television?

This is what is happening in several swing states in the last week of the campaign. Voters are being bombarded by television and radio ads, mailings, and telephone calls. The purpose of this is to “close the sell”, according to the OTM report. Paul Ingles, who was reporting from New Mexico, said that traffic reports within the state are now sponsored by the Bush/ Cheney campaign. Yes, the president is tossing in political attacks just after many people listen for the most recent accident and get an idea of how long it will take to get home. These messages are believed to be highly effective because people are very concentrated on what the traffic reporter is saying. Rick Frishman said that the ads are almost subliminal because it hard to distinguish the traffic reports from the advertisement because the reporter does not change the level of their voice. An example would be:

There is a two- car pile up just south of Las Cruces on the 188. Traffic will condense to one lane and will be slow for quite some time. This traffic report is brought to you by the Bush Cheney campaign that wants to remind you that one year after the September 11 attacks, John Kerry voted to slash intelligence by six billion, which would have compromised our nations defense.

Frishman also went on to say that the reporters themselves give more influence than the ads do themselves. People have been listening to these traffic reporters for twenty and thirty years in some cases. The people trust them and what they say because of the countless hours that they have saved by listening to their reports and thus avoiding problem areas. Kevin Madden, who works for the Bush campaign said that sponsoring such traffic reports is a unique and effective form of advertising. Not only are people stuck in traffic with no place to go, but also they’re in a situation where they are not expecting to hear political advertisements. This leads to the possibility that these people who are frustrated and upset, will not critique or even notice that they are hearing a pro- Bush or Anti- Kerry advertisement.

The Kerry campaign has not gone as far to sponsor traffic reports but they are getting many celebrity advertisements on talk radio. They are either using their time as a guest on a show to promote Senator Kerry (Sheryl Crow in Nevada, just recently) or they are doing PSA’s, which simply remind and encourage people to vote. However, don’t be fooled by this seemingly non- partisan ad. In the case of MTV, who encourages their fans to “rock the vote” they don’t want their fans to “rock” in any way they choose. All of the programming behind the slogan “rock the vote” highly favors Kerry and slams Bush with no regard. So even though they are saying “rock the vote”, it really means rock the vote for Kerry. This is also an effective strategy that plays into the Kerry campaign ideal, that if we can encourage enough people to vote, then enough of them will vote our way.

What position have all of these political ads and attacks put us in. The OTM report suggests that the onslaught of political advertisements may sour some voters into not voting at all. The overkill that people have faced in the swing states may cause some political fatigue or simply irritate people to the point where they choose to not vote at all. Bobby Box, who is a morning talk show host for an oldies station in New Mexico said, “It’s getting old, but what are we going to do?…It only happens every four years and then its gone and we don’t have to deal with it anymore…I think we can live with it a little longer.”

Well, I agree. Election years are very intense with political advertising, but shouldn’t they be? We are electing not only our president but also the most powerful man in the world. At least it will all be over by the time I give my presentation.

For my criticism assignment this week I watched and brought in a clip of the new reality show, “He’s a Lady.” This show brings in normal guys and makes them she –males. They shave all of their body hair, wear women’s clothes, wear make up, and apparently they were put through “lady boot camp” so they can appear to be more feminine. Now the guys aren’t gay or feel they are trapped in man’s body or thing like that. Instead the goal of the show is to be the last “man” standing because one million dollars in prize money goes to the winner. It follows the survivor model of reality shows, by eliminating one person each week until one person is left.

I think that this show is not only trying to jump on the reality TV bandwagon, but also put men in opposite stereotypical roles. This show plays upon the masculinity of males and over portrays how hard it is for men to dress up like women and go out into public and act feminine. These guys have to tuck their egos away and act in a way that would make their great grandfathers role over in their graves. What I find interesting about the show is the change in mannerism within the guys. In the episode I watched they went out to a crowded bowling alley and tried to look like a group of women who are out for a good time. I need to say that these guys do their own make up, so it doesn’t take more than a couple looks before a stranger can figure that they are in “drag”. With that in mind it wasn’t long before a crowd gathered behind them starring in disbelief in what they were seeing. It was so funny, because all these guys were trying to steal the spotlight away from each other. Most of them did not want to seem athletic because we all know that normal women aren’t athletic. So they weakly flung the ball down the lane without a prayer of it knocking down a pin and they walked back to their seats and girlishly flung up their hands as to say ‘who cares?’ The guys were chatting it up with each other when it wasn’t their and had to be reminded that they had to stop talking for a second to keep the game going. What they were doing is over playing stereotypes of how some women act at bowling alleys. Trying to seem disinterested in the game and making a show of it when they screwed up actually caused more attention to come onto them than if they hadn’t played on them at all. One other thing that was funny is there is a big, fat guy on the show and he was talking about how bad it felt not to have anyone look at him when they went out. He was saying that he had never really thought about it but he does notice that people do come up to some of the other guys (who actually do look pretty believable) and no one ever approaches him. He said that not many people ever know what its like to be self conscious and sit in the back of crowd, waiting for someone to notice you. I can understand what he’s saying because that feeling can happen to both men and women, but to see how upset this guy was, in itself was very strange.

The biggest spin on reality though, came when it was time vote for who got booted off. In stereotypical ‘real life situations’ guys would say, “Okay, I don’t like him because he poses a threat to me or he has to go because he sucks.” These guys when they were doing their “confessions to the camera” (if you don’t know what I mean, think ‘Real World) were saying, “You know I really like him and I don’t want to cut anyone, because all these guys are so great, but if have to…” This shows a total shift in gender roles. Guys never usually care about uplifting someone before they rip them down, that role is usually left for women. You see this and you think they’re either over dramatizing this or playing the part of a woman is actually having an effect on them. I think that it’s a little of both. They are being overdramatical in order to win the money.