ICTs and job replacement

I found the recent reading by Crow and Longford very informative in the sense that it brings up issues that are very raw and recent in today's society. Many people fail to ackowledge the rise of ICTs and technology in general. More specifically, Dr. Sevigny discussed the replacement and displacement of job within the information workforce and how robots have replaced jobs that used to be held by real people, people with families, homes, lifestlyes and well beings to uphold. I was quick to think of a personal link to such an issue, an uncle of mine worked as a customer service representative 3 years ago, and had been "laid off" at the time due to the fact they he, and 50 other workers, were no longer needed. This was the first example of the issue I ever experienced, and always heard of such things happening, but never really thought of. It took him a long time to get used to the idea, but seeing as how he was 44 at the time, he was not very eligible for any sufficient job positions along the same lines. In such a case, he had no other choice but to accept work at various places to hold off until he was done a 2 year program in college in order to make the requirements for a job position that would offer him enough money to sustain a comfortable standard of living. I was able to link this scenario to Dr. Sevigny's lecture and how the information workforce today is very demanding and always upgrading it's standards through the years.

Blog for Sunday Nov. 19/2006 - Listening

After discussing the differnt types of listening methods in lecture last week, it has become quite clear to me just how common every form really is, especially in my own experiences. In the matter this one week, i have witnessed or actually performed myself, most of the forms of lstening.

Most commonly wiht my parents, i find myself pseudolistening. The other day I my mother and i were speaking on the phone while i was out withmy friends and i could hear her voice, but was so used to the routine check-up phonecall thaat i caught myself answering with the reguler "yes" and "ok"'s every one in a while, without acutally listening to what was being said.

Later on, another faulty listening behaviour i witnessed was selective listening. I was telling my boyfriend about was i had done the previous night, and i caught on that he was watching T.V and was throwing in the random "uh-huh" every few seconds, but didn't actually clue into the conversation until I brought up the part where I went to TCBY, and obviously, right then he said, "what? TCBY? oh, now im craving ice cream", and all of a sudden he began atualyl talking in the conversation.

Next, I was out with my friends, and one of them was telling us a story about her boyfriend, but every 2 minutes my other friend would turn the conversation to somehow relate to her own experiences and go on a 5 minute rant about herself, leaving us all to listen to her speka instead, i relaized thsi was a form of stage hogging, which is actually more common than i originally thought.

I just thought it was cool that i was able to pick out all of these faulty listening behvaiours in my own experiences in everday situaions.

blog entry for Sunday, November 12

TV Advertisements
I found this week’s lectures to be the most interesting, mostly because they were very easy to relate to, very “modern” and in perspective to today’s society. Mostly, I enjoyed the segment on advertisements on television, and how they are interpreted by people that are part of confined cultures, in the case of Gillespie’s article, Punjabi youth in Southall. I can completely understand the point that Gillespie is making, in the sense that most ads are not actually selling the product itself, but more importantly a certain “feeling” that this product can create for the consumer. These feelings are what Gillespie is explaining that the Punjabi youth are critically analyzing and interpreting from the advertisements. In many advertisements today, it is easy to point out this very familiar approach.

The example that I thought of was the Toyota Matrix commercials, all of which propose a certain feeling that comes along with driving this specific car. In fact, the “feeling” is what is most associated with the car, rather than its concrete automotive features. Personally, I drive a Toyota Matrix, and was not one of the people that was easily influenced by the commercial, but also do not feel anything but ordinary while driving the car, which makes the concept even more interesting.



In this commercial, not one word is narrated, and not one word is spoken by a character in the advertisement, rather the drivers’ feelings are well communicated through their expressions and the effects in the commercial. Just by watching the commercial you get the feeling or come up with the words, “excitement”, “dream”, “extraordinary”, “futuristic”, mainly because these are the feelings that the commercial is trying to portray through the car. The car is featured in different colours, different styles, all of which are driven by different and unique drivers. Another interesting concept, the commercial first starts off with ONE car, and then suddenly splits into two, then three, four, different and unique versions of the car, with different and unique drivers, all of which are reunited at the end of the commercial when all of the cars meet and form into one, bringing all of the drivers together in one vehicle. This concept outlines the fact that the vehicle is versatile, yet common ground for different people to relate. Lastly, the final words at the end of the commercial, “Break Away”, implying that the car enables you to break away from reality, feeling like you are in a dream. Finally, the company slogan, “Toyota: The Feeling Never Ends”, proving that they are in fact promoting a feeling that the viewer and/or consumer would wish to feel.

Overall, I felt that I could really relate most of the ads I see on television today to Gillespie’s thoughts in the article, and found the article very accurate with the trends in today’s society.

CCB 4 - The Dixie Chicks and Free Speech

In today’s society of mass media, it is easy to confuse fact from fiction. In my opinion, this is caused by misinterpretation on the part of the recorder/presenter (media), or miscommunication on the part of the speaker (in most cases, a celebrity or public image). In recent years, tabloids and gossip columns have become a trend, which is an issue because most of the information presented in these forms of media are purposely skewed or altered in order to make the content more interesting for the reader. On the other hand, some forms of media; magazines, newspapers and TV News, also present false content due to misinterpretation of the information or miscommunication by the source.





A very popular example of this concept today is the controversy between the Dixie Chicks’ lead singer, Natalie Maines’ and her comment on U.S. President, George Bush. I found that this issue closely related to the power of language, as illustrated in Chapter three, and the concept of perception checking in Chapter two of the textbook, Understanding Human Communication. Although the issue occurred in March 2003, the release of the documentary, “Shut Up and Sing”, which is a summary of the band’s experiences, has brought it up once again. This scenario illustrates the many misconceptions the media can present, the different interpretations of messages, the miscommunication of the message and how much damage each of these communication problems can cause. When Natalie Maines stated, “…and we are ashamed that the President of the United Sates is from Texas”, at a London performance the night before the War on Terrorism in Iraq began, many unexpected responses were made, those few words changed their career, and pushed some people to extreme hatred towards them, even a threat to Natalie Maines’ life. The severity of the outcome portrays the power of language and how words and how they are presented can make people feel different things and act certain ways. They way Natalie chose her words and the context in which they were used, made it possible for the message to be perceived in many different ways, causing different people to have different opinions or stances on her statement. This also led to the perception of the message by media, which obviously took advantage of Natalie’s words and the openness of the statement. In this case, the situation is closely related to Perception-Checking, outlined in Chapter One of the Textbook, Understanding Human Communication. The speaker, Natalie Maines, and also the interpreter, the media, fans, President Bush, should have completed the three steps to perception checking. The three steps being completed, describe the behaviour that you notice, come up with at least two possible interpretations, and request verification, would have resulted in a more successful communication and presentation of the message. After the analysis of Natalie’s statement, she was able to rephrase her statement in a more appropriate and less offensive manner, but still end up having her opinion voiced, which remained the same. Natalie went on to say that she did not intend to offend the presidential office, but simply does not agree with President George Bush’s actions.

Due to the fact that the criticism towards Natalie’s opinion continued, this showed that the there was no longer room for misinterpretation, and that the basis of the entire controversy was no longer about how said it, but the fact that she said anything in the first place. This was where the issue turned, and caused The Dixie Chicks to stand by their opinion and fight for their rights for free speech, with the making and release of their documentary on the entire situation. I was never a fan of the Dixie Chicks music, but I am indeed a fan of their ability to stand by their opinion, despite the negative perception by many people.




Bibliography

Adler, B. Ronald and George Rodman. Understanding Human Communication. NewYork: Oxford 2006.

CCB 3 - "Elephant Shoes"

During last week’s lecture regarding the development of interpersonal relationships, I found myself relating to the relational development stages, and realizing just how accurate the different stages are. Along with my personal experiences of failed and successful relationships, I quickly remembered an independent film I had watched a few months ago which was based on the development of the average relationship. The film I thought of is entitled, “Elephant Shoes”, and is basically a breakdown of the typical romantic relationship into chapters which are closely related to the stages of the relationship development perspective discussed in lecture. In the film, two strangers meet randomly, and without expecting it, form a “12-hour” love relationship, each hour representing a different chapter or stage in the relationship development. This relationship starts off casual, flourishes into a complex and serious connection, and ultimately terminates, all in the course of half a day. Although the eleven chapters are not named exactly the same as the developmental perspective stages outlined in chapter six of the textbook, Understanding Human Communication, the basic ideas of the scenes and what occurs in each hour still manage to accurately imitate them.

In the first stage of the developmental perspective, Initiating, we learned that the two people make a first impression on one another; similarly, in chapters one and two of the film, entitled “flirtation” and “awkwardness” the two characters bump into each other, introduce themselves, make their initial decisions about one another and initiate a date. In the second stage of the developmental perspective, Experimenting, the two participants make “small talk” and get to know one another more personally, this is when they decide whether or not they wish to pursue the relationship. In chapter three, “Denial”, and four, “Romance”, in the film, the two characters realize they like each other, and go on to the next level. In the third stage, Intensifying, a lot of metacommunication takes place, along with an increasing amount of time spent together. In the film’s third and fourth chapters, “Courtship” and “Jealousy”, the two find themselves interacting more openly, taking part in activities together, and talking about more personal issues. If the intensifying stage is successful, the next stage is develops, Integrating. In the integrating stage of relational development, the participants become a unit, and gain an official title. In comparison, the film’s seventh chapter “Trust” illustrates similar actions. The two come out with their feelings and become more trusting in one another. In the fifth stage of the developmental perspective, Bonding, typically the two people appear together in public and enjoy each other’s presence, this can be closely related to the eighth chapter of the film, “Commitment”, where the couple both become committed to the relationship. In both the developmental model and the film, ‘Elephant Shoes’, this is the point in which the relationship would take a turn. In the sixth stage of the developmental perspective, Differentiating, the two people want to feel independent once again, find the relationship becoming too intense, and need more time alone; similar things occur in the ninth chapter of the film, “Routine”, the couple finds themselves in a routine stage, where everything is familiar, and there is no longer the excitement they used to encounter, they grow tired of the relationship, but do not talk about it. In the seventh and eighth stages of the developmental perspective, Circumscribing and Stagnation, someone starts sectioning off themselves from the other and the two no longer have dialogue between them, similarly in chapter ten of the film, “Crossroads”, the couple find themselves both facing the decision of whether or not they want to stay in the relationship, not very much communication takes place within this chapter. Lastly, in the ninth and tenth stages of the developmental perspective, Avoiding and Terminating, one of the two people, if not both, begin avoiding the other person, and decide to ultimately end the relationship, in chapter eleven of the film, “Acceptance”, the girl leaves unexpectedly, and the man lets her, accepting the fact that the time they shared was meaningful, but had to end.

When I first saw the film, I thought the concept was very interesting and very accurate to my personal experiences. When reading chapter six of the text, and during last week’s lecture, I yet again found myself intrigued with how accurate the developmental perspective really was, which is why I immediately referred back to the film I had watched months before.


For more information on the film, visit
http://www.elephantshoesmovie.com/



Bibligography

Adler, B. Ronald and George Rodman. Understanding Human Communication. NewYork: Oxford 2006.

Elephant Shoes. Dir. Christos Sourligas. Perf. Stacey Morgan Lewis, Greg Shamie. One Man Band Films/Alliance Atlantis Vivafilm, 2006.