Oxfam and Behind the Brands: Mondelez

1) Choose one of the big ten companies showcased in the Oxfam Behind the Brands website. What is its humanitarian score?

I found it more than difficult while scrolling through all the brands to find one that was over 50%. The grand total: 1, it's score being 54%. A pass, but still a fail to most. The company and brand I chose was Mondelez, specifically it's brand Cadbury. It's overall score is 29% leveling out to be 'Poor' on the scales the website has created. 

2) What areas did the company score the lowest points in?

Cadbury and Mondelez scored its lowest point in 'Land', its score being 1. With the score of 2, was 'Women' and 'Water' while the other 4 areas scored in 3s and 4s. 

3) What are the different methods that Oxfam has given you through the site to affect global market behaviors?

There is the link to send a message to Canada's governor to the World Bank, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. Another way is the petitions you can sign against various companies and actions they make as well as the option to join the GROW Campaign. 

4) How can you change the behaviors of large corporations?
Using today's media as an advantage, it's easy to spread the word via. Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Pinterest or email. This gets you into forms and debate online which has a much wider audience on an international scale than it used to. There you can speak with people who share your concerns and spread the message around. 

Writing letters are always an option for more of an individual protest and way to voice your concern, however campaigns are usually more effective as the massive swarm of voices heard can make yours more than just an echo in an empty room. This works as more of a formal protest and respectable one however if a company continues to ignore the voices of their consumers, boycotting is an option as well as a public demonstration (no violence intended here, just a group of people showing what they care about- violence can turn your message the other way and lose you supporters). Phone calls are also an option, though old fashioned and rarely noticed. There are many ways to get in contact with companies, the CEO is the better figure to be in contact with as supposed to a representative as your message will go to the top right away. 

5) Put a link to the Oxfam site in your blog entry. 

[Link here]

Reddit and Worldstarhiphop vs. Freedom of Speech

Read the two articles that criticize Worldstarhiphop and Reddit and answer the following questions.
Article Criticizing Reddit  ||  Article Criticizing Worldstarhiphop


1. How do we find a balance between free speech and hate speech on the internet? Should all websites have a moderator to censor content that is unfit for viewing?
Yes, I believe websites should have at least two or three moderators if I'm honest with myself. Through personal experience, being the host and moderator to a blog, I know that when stress builds up you can make impulsive decisions (mostly when hate comments come in, replying to them with a sassy attitude that doesn't really give a damn about what they say when really the question should be deleted) that hinder the effect and professional reputation a blog can have. In the last few months, I've recruited a co-host to assist me in what the blog was created for (It's a writing blog) and she and I both work off one another so we can continue the professional appearance the blog has. 
Regarding the articles: The people of the internet believe they can push the boundaries society has set concerning responsibility and rights and have managed to put both aside when it comes to posting opinions. As one of the most famous lines in Comic Books goes (Marvel's Spiderman- Uncle Ben), "With great power comes great responsibility". This I find applies to these situations. People with power believed they can say what they wish when in reality, this is far from the truth. If an article on the internet, or a video or any source material shows something that can be offensive to someone on a personal discriminatory level, I believe then that it is inappropriate and should be looked over by a moderator. 
2. Should there be a law banning people from uploading videos of abuse and illegal acts.
I believe there should be yes. However appealing to this matter on a different side, internet videos have helped multiple investigation services find those responsible for a crime or act. For example, there was a video a few years ago of a group of young men breaking into a car and smashing it up. Within 24 hours the police found and arrested each individual because they uploaded the video to Youtube. Now this is simply stupidity when trying to commit a crime in hopes to get away with it in my humble opinion. Looking back on my initial view though, the boys probably wouldn't have gotten the idea of break into the car in the first place if there weren't already videos posted on the internet of others committing the same act. The question has multiple answers, each with valuable facts and reasons behind them however mine remains at yes, there should be a law against posting videos and abuse and illegal acts to the internet. 
3. Does having sites like Worldstarhiphop and Reddit do anything to add to our culture and society or they simply a reflection of the darkest part of our society? 
This question is a difficult one to answer, I believe there can be multiple ways to answer it, very much like the question above. It would be ideal to think they only show the darkest part of our society and contribute nothing to our culture however like most thoughts regarding such a matter, the ideal isn't the reality. The culture of 'hip-hop' has been taken far away from that of what I believe was the original intention. The videos on the internet and the articles and opinions posted spark a thought in others heads that think this kind of behavior is acceptable and right. This thought sparked creates the next set and generation of acts that follow along in their prior's footsteps, this being said, yes these acts today have and will add to our culture. 

Adbusters: Starbucks

 Starbucks was in the news in November of 2008 due to the concerns of environmentalists and those concerned over the world's fresh and clean water supply. Beside (or above, however your browser accepts this webpage) is an Adbusters spoof ad that I've made in Photoshop as part of this unit and assignment. The text reads: (Top) We'll waste the rest of the world's fresh water supply to give you the highest in sanitary heath standards in our mission to provide you with over priced coffee. As it's probably obvious, I'm not a Starbucks person. I much prefer Tim Horton's and a good University fund.

"A controversy erupted last week when a United Kingdom newspaper reported that millions of gallons of water was being wasted by Starbucks each day because of its policy of keeping taps running non-stop at thousands of stores around the world."

Was the first paragraph in the article from Greenbiz and was pretty much the sum up of the article. With the world's fresh water supply only being 10% and most of it being unattainable, are we really able to throw our precious resource away like this? Yes sanitary standards are a major concern, especially with big companies and corporations however the environment should take bigger claim over decisions than egos.

American Apparel and Adbusters

1. Choose an article that is critical of the actions or behaviors of a major corporation or popular company or icon and post a link to your blog. 
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-10-31/american-apparel-ceo-dov-charney-on-his-controversial-ad 

2. What is the intended message of the article?
The intended message is to show the CEO of American Apparel's side of the mess that was created when American Apparel launched an ad after hurricane Sandy releasing a 20% off sale to the nine states most effected by the storm. The writer of the article does have some biased towards the situation however when the interview was conducted the replies given by Dov Charney are nothing but acceptable and empathetic. He does what he does and he apologizes in his own words while keeping a professional ere by saying "We've never claimed to be a perfect advertiser. Our heart is always in the right place. We’re just trying to bring a little value to everyone. It’s all about fun.". 

3. Are you surprised by the content of the article? Is there anything in the article that you were not already aware of?

I was surprised to hear the side of the CEO of the company and what he had to say on the matter. I was aware, being a shopper at American Apparel as well as having multiple friends who work in the stores on the floor and back in stock that the ads are said to ere on the side of pornography to some extent. "The clothing retailer, long criticized for using porn imagery to hawk underwear and T-shirts..."

4. How do you think you can change the original intended message of the company or to question the ideals of the company you have chosen?
The intended message of the company is generally classified as fashion and spreading it however the way they advertise is already enough to put people off without the need for controversy in the news. 

5. Post a link to a print ad that is currently presenting the companies image to the public.
Ad 1
Ad 2 (website- can see any ad posted)

6. Post an Adbuster spoof ad that is critical of the company. 
The ad isn't necessarily a spoof but instead is a letter from Adbusters to American Apparel and in response a letter to the editor back from the company. 

Adbusters

1.Cut and paste one spoof ad from Adbusters and explain the meaning of the Advertisement.

 

This ad speaks volumes about today's values and modern pop culture. Personally I can name every brand on the left side while only three leaves match a name in my mind on the right. The meaning is to say that we as people individual and as a society are cut off from nature and too far in deep with marketing and consumerism. Be it that we spend too much time in the city and shopping malls are taking over the trees and small parks within the downtown and greater area, or that we've lost the essential knowledge of nature the ad is effective.

2.How does the spoof ad change the original intended message of the company?

The spoof ad has the company logos drawn like an elementary school kid would as well as the leaves on the opposite side. It changes the logos to make them look more simple and reserved like the leaves and it shows just how recognizable they are that even if they aren't drawn full scale or colored like how we know them, they are still more recognizable than leaves we see everyday. For example, the leave that's in the top left corner is a maple leaf, what Canada's flag is known for and what we see every day. I asked the person next to me what it was and they couldn't tell me but they could tell me what the Nike symbol was right off the bat.

 

3. Do you think the  spoof ad is effective in making consumers question the original message of the company?

It does make you think twice about how we regard brands in today's society compared to the nature that is supposedly surrounding us. 

 

4. Do you agree or disagree with the sentiment of the spoof ad? 

I agree with the statement completely that we know pop culture more than we do nature and what surrounds us. 

Another ad that shows the same message, that we know modern irrelevant things that the media conveys almost 24/7 is this: Name the people we should be learning about for the things they've done vs. name the people we know for doing stupid things and being famous in today's pop culture. 

Ivory Wars: Last Stand in Zakouma (Presentation Preperation)

Documentary- Ivory Wars: Last Stand in Zakouma by Micheal Nichols and J. Micheal Fay

http://mediastorm.com/publication/ivory-wars-last-stand-in-zakouma

1. Describe the ways different people in the Documentary behaved, or the kinds of values and beliefs they displayed. Replay an element from the film to support your opinion.

The various values first are positive and respectful towards the national park in Zakouma, the photographer finding the life beautiful as he travelled to capture it. However the tables turn in view point when the topic of elephant tusking is introduced and the poachers brought in as the main antagonist of the documentary and message. The values shown by the armed guards of the national park in Zakouma are the elephants safety seeing as it's their job to protect them and the boarders of the park. The values of the poachers waiting along the border for the elephants are money: The tusks of an elephant, the ivory in them will sell for quite a bit on the Black Market. (Guards not following and Poachers right on the borderline of the park waiting)

2.  How much do you agree or disagree with the ways in which they behaved, or the kinds of values and beliefs they displayed? Explain your feelings and point of view by replaying an element to support your opinion.

I've always been disgusted of elephant tusking and shark finning, anything that involves killing something for one part of them and disposing of the rest in an inhumane manor. (We however as humans do this to the earth all the time so in someone else's point of view I could be considered a heretic.) The idea of greed to take away something’s life for one thing, and sell it out of greed for money isn't a value I agree with. There are more humane and honorable ways to make a living and killing isn't one of them.

(Quote about the poachers- "Expense is paid by the look in their eyes")

I do agree with protecting the elephants however I don't believe they need to be protected by humans, we've created a bit of a civil war on such matters as these don't you think? Human on Human. I completely disagree with the idea that the elephants are only protected when inside the park; if it was a mission to protect the elephants then the guards should travel with them instead of leave them when they move to find better food that the designated spot couldn't offer. (Replay part when guards don't follow elephants)

3.  Was there anything about the Documentary that was biased or omitted? If there was, why do you think things may have been left out?

The side of the poachers was left out, most likely to make them the antagonist in the viewer's eyes and create a loving mutual bond with the elephants featured.

4.  How did things like music, lighting, editing, statistics, expert opinions, news footage, celebrity opinions, testimonials (characters directly addressing the camera) and the various conventions of documentary affect your opinion of what you were viewing? Replay an element from the film that demonstrates one of the conventions of documentary film making.

The music played when the elephants were being featured was more of a contemporary jazz___ There weren't any real testimonials or celebrity opinions however the editing and the graph of the elephants trail was a rather engaging aspect and part of the documentary. It was neat to see the red dots travel so far and the weekly markers come up but then the dots stopped and started blinking in one spot, you didn't need the commentary to realize that it meant the elephants had been found and killed. (Replay area) It engaged to a level of intensity, almost like a video game to me. I was fascinated, always hoping they'd turn back to safety but test the limits of how far freedom would let them live until finally it was game over with no restarting the level or going back to the last checkpoint. The use of lighting and editing on the images of the animals and wildlife brought them beauty and dazzle while the images of the poachers used that are slightly out of focus and blurred around the edges with poor quality show the side they want to expose of them. (Replay example)

5.  What is the overall message of the documentary? Is the message effectively conveyed to the audience? Choose one point in the film that demonstrates effective communication of the overall message.

The overall message of Ivory Wars is raising awareness of the situation and to further the cause to stop it. The final quote of the documentary is:

"Zakouma's future as a wildlife refuge depends on the continuing dedication of its guards. And support from the outside world." And gives a bit of a push, like most documentaries with a cause to promote it or do something yourself to assist with the situation.

Photograph by Michael Fay

Remember These Days Seltzer Man: Documentry

1. Describe the ways different people in the Documentary behaved, or the kinds of values and beliefs they displayed.
The seltzer man in the documentary, who was the featured character valued his family as well as tradition and his work. Constantly speaking about his Grandfather and his Father at the beginning of the documentary, he introduced the fact that he was continuing with their work, going on the same route and using the same 90 year old bottles.

2.  How much do you agree or disagree with the ways in which they behaved, or the kinds of values and beliefs they displayed?
How he behaved was very inspiring, how dedicated he was to his work was admirable however when it came to the topic of his current family, his wife who was only mentioned once and his boys who were mentioned a few times, it was rushed. When his first kid was born, he said he was there at the hospital and then when he saw his boy all clean up and pretty, he had to leave and finish his route. The values of his past family were strong and well spoken of but when on the topic of his current family, it seemed his work outweighed them, or at least this is how it came aross in the documentary.

3.  Was there anything about the Documentary that was biased or omitted? If there was, why do you think things may have been left out?
Back to the topic of family, he barely spoke about his wife. His kids were mentioned a few times, when he spoke briefly of his first childs birth and then again on them taking over the business if they wanted to. His wife was only mentioned the one time though, besides that left out. His work was the main focus of the documentary and that was the only side of him we received. Yes we got some of his family life but that was all connected to his work and his values of the saltza and the bottles.

4.  How did things like music, lighting, editing, statistics, expert opinions, news footage, celebrity opinions, testimonials (characters directly addressing the camera) and the various conventions of documentary affect your opinion of what you were viewing?
The artistic aspects of the documentary and the different techniques used such as lighting, filming and music brought a mood, quality and respect to the film. The most noted example was the filming of the bottles, when they were being cleaned and stored. The angle was a simple pan shot that blurred out the background and showed a crystal clear bottle with clear reflections and proper lighting. It brought a beauty to them that appeared over and over again. The music in the documentary was simple and not over used. The first example was moreso at the opening when the jazzy tune brought in the swing of the route when showing him in his truck while the last clip of music was more sudude and meaningful as it brought in the finals words.

5.  What is the overall message of the documentary? Is the message effectively conveyed to the audience?
The overall message of this documentary is family, respect and tradition. [Everyone wants someone knew, but these bottles have been here for 90 years and this world works on stability] is the just of what he was saying. On the topic of cellphones and how his kids always wants what's new, he brought in the idea of the bottles and how even though they aren't as new as they were, there are still people who depend on them and need them.