Media Blog Reflection: How a Critical Thinking Teacher Made 30 Teens Really Paranoid

     Eight weeks later and we've reached the bitter end. The death of Metta (Cognition) World Peace isn't entirely sad, though. At funerals, we celebrate a person's life by telling stories and reflecting upon positive memories. This final post will be a celebration of the great times had through Metta (Cognition) World Peace and a reflection on what we can take away from a semester of the most useful class we will take at McClatchy: Critical Thinking.
     Though I'd like to think that keeping this blog has led me to renounce my consumption of media entirely, that's definitely not the case. At the end of the semester, I'd say that I now consume roughly the same amount of media as I did at the beginning. But that doesn't mean this class was a failure. Unless I completely misinterpreted the point of Critical Thinking, I don't think Mr. Starace intends for this class to be about why media is the worst thing ever. Media literacy isn't about hating media, but rather recognizing what media surrounds us and the implications it has on our lives. In this sense, keeping this blog has been extremely helpful. I'm without a doubt more aware of the techniques and messages present in ads. For instance, just yesterday I noticed this stick of Old Spice in my bathroom:

Just a few months ago, I would have seen this, chuckled, and moved on with my life. Now I know how naive my poor old self was. Today, I look at this deodorant and see the "Wit and Humor" and "Magic Solutions" techniques. Apparently masculinity also has a scent, which comes from scent elves. This is just one example of how my view of the media around me has changed this semester. 

     Even though I'm now aware of some of the flaws in media, I don't plan to change my behavior because of that. Simply having high media literacy is enough to better appreciate media and understand the effects of our consumption. My relationship with Gatorade is a great example. Gatorade was my assigned brand for the media analysis project, and I've found that Gatorade's marketing strategy relies on our insecurities and desire to find success (in this case through sports). Thinking about it on a deeper level has helped me find that this is really stupid; there are plenty of other ways to be successful than by being a famous athlete. Still, Gatorade tastes good, and I know that refraining from buying it won't change anything: Gatorade will still exist, I won't become a pro athlete, and the world will go on. But just recognizing that Gatorade's message is stupid has made me more self-aware, which gives companies like Gatorade less influence over my life.

     When it comes down to it, avoiding media is impossible. At the beginning of the semester, I'd say a lot of us had this preconceived notion that "media" consists of phones and social media, and that it's inherently bad. Considering that media is any medium of communication, I'd say we've all changed our views a little. What I've taken away from this semester is that a little bit of paranoia is a good thing. Given that media is unavoidable, we obviously can't dissect every media message and avoid the harm media does. If that were possible, we'd all be living in bomb shelter basements wearing tin-foil hats. Being a good consumer simply involves questioning the media presented to you and recognizing that media outlets don't control your life. To paraphrase Mitt Romney, media outlets are people. We are people. Media is just people spreading messages to other people, and we have say over how we are influenced.

     So congratulations, Mr. Starace. You've created a group of 30 media literate, slightly paranoid teenagers. I often question the value of most of what we do at school, but Critical Thinking has been a bright spot. The media blogs were one of the few assignments that I both enjoyed and got something out of. (Isn't it weird how most of school assumes we can't do both?) To thank you for an awesome semester, here's the complement to your Che Dogvara poster: Fidel Catro.

     Thanks again. Metta (Cognition) World Peace signing off.

Quite Possibly the Greatest Video to Ever Grace the Internet

     Please watch the following video:

     I don't have much to say about this video, but as we're nearing the end of our media blogs, I thought I should share with everyone the gem that is "Car Phone." Several parts of the video actually relate well to some of the topics from Merchants of Cool. The first few times I watched "Car Phone," I found it hilarious but couldn't exactly figure out why. The video itself is pretty stupid, so why do I continue to laugh at it? It seems to me that we're meant to see our parents in the protagonist/narrator played by YouTuber Julian Smith. Smith's character is the stereotypical "dad," complete with dorky glasses, slightly creepy mustache, and sort of nice shirt tucked into dress pants. What's funny about him, though, is how he interacts with technology. First of all, it's clearly outdated. The devices in the background while he irons his pants are a radio and T.V. set that look pretty antiquated. The subject of the song, Smith's car phone, is just a landline phone in a car - not all that impressive.
     Yet Smith's reaction to his gadgets is what we find funny. The song makes one point clear: the man loves his car phone. His excitement over technology that seems primitive to us is exactly the kind of fascination we see in our parents and grandparents when they use modern electronics. To paraphrase Mean Girls, it's sort of like watching a dog walk on its hind legs. At 1:56 into the video, Smith's character uses an old video camera to dramatically film the ground. Haven't we all experienced laughing at our parents for not understanding how to use common electronic devices? (Maybe not, I could just be a terrible person.) In Smith's ridiculous relationship with technology we see our parents, making the video a relatable piece of comedy.
     The fact that we find Smith's "dad" character funny shows the huge divide between our generation and our parents' generation that's discussed in Merchants of Cool. We clearly have a standard of what's hip and what isn't. The latter are often things associated with our parents like Smith's "dad" outfit and outdated phone. We find these things funny because of their lack of relevance in pop culture. Merchants of Cool discusses young peoples' tendency to rebel against their parents and create a "cool" identity of their own. "Car Phone" is funny because the subject and main character are totally outside the realm of what we consider cool. The video touches on that in the shots of Smith's son, who looks completely done with his father and his obsession with his car phone. In a lot of ways, we are the son: angsty teens embarrassed by our parents' cluelessness. And like the son, we want to be unique from our parents. (The son does so by using an iPhone.)
     This raises the question: will the iPhone eventually become the next car phone? I have no idea, but at least we can find some comfort in the fact that "Car Phone" exists. Thanks, Julian Smith.

How Mussels Killed the Hopes and Dreams of Teenagers Across America

     As many of you remember, AP testing happened last month. (Actually, you might have just pushed this memory into the depths of your mind with the rest of your traumatic memories, in which case you don't remember.) It was a stressful time for students across the country as they prepared for testing. When the day of the AP Biology exam finally came, I felt prepared: I had memorized the steps of cellular respiration and photosynthesis, the Hardy-Weinberg formula, and how DNA replication works. I opened the test booklet with all of this information stored away and the first question was about...mussels. Every AP Bio student in the country stressed over memorizing cellular respiration, but it didn't appear once on the test; yet we got a question about salinity in mussels, something not discussed once in class.

One positive of the exam was the memes!

     Some might say that AP testing is stupid. Why should we have to memorize facts and numbers in class, only to be asked if we know how to read a graph on the exam? At first, this was my reaction. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that AP testing itself isn't stupid - it just seems so because there's serious disconnect between how American education works and what the College Board (the entity that writes AP exams) expects.
     The College Board actually expects good skills of us. The questions on the AP Bio exam required graph analysis, logic, and problem-solving, all valuable skills to have. I think most people found the exam hard because these aren't skills that are emphasized as much in day-to-day school. People prepared for the exam by memorizing facts, which is what school typically encourages us to do. A good way to understand American education is by thinking back to a talk we had in history a few months ago. Some teachers are hesitant to teach the Holocaust in classrooms because the goal of education as a whole is to memorize facts simply to spit them back on a test. This very mechanical way of learning would detract from the emotional value of teaching the Holocaust.

Oh, the memes!

   The implications of this type of education are pretty depressing. As it is now, the most valuable skill you can have in a classroom isn't even learned: memory. With as much grade inflation as there is, having a decently good memory is good enough to succeed in a class. Because of this, succeeding in a class isn't all that impressive. One could easily memorize a set of facts or a sequence of phrases that earns them an "A," but in reality have no idea what the facts mean. (That basically summarizes my math class this year.)
     This is why a 5 on an AP exam is so much more valuable than an "A" in school. With the structure of American education as it is, students aren't exactly set up to do well on AP exams. This makes it much harder to succeed on AP's than in a regular class.
     Then what makes some people more likely than others to do well on AP exams? As Mr. Warren has been telling us all year, the AP Bio exam is an intelligence test. Because the College Board tests us on critical thinking (lol) skills we usually don't get from school, students who are naturally good problem-solvers, thinkers, etc. are given a huge advantage on the exams. Until the US Department of Education realizes the inconsistencies between public school systems and national college-level exams, AP testing will continue to be an intelligence test.

More memes!

Dispatch and Why People Like War

     Last week's post about rap got me thinking about music. One of my favorite songs is "The General," by Dispatch. The song tells a pretty straightforward story: a distinguished, respected general has a dream the night before a great battle, and after a sudden epiphany tells his soldiers to go home; when the men refuse to move, the general prepares for battle.

The General - Dispatch

      Not surprisingly, "The General" is a commentary on war. The song's lyrics start off by describing the general's many accomplishments. The first verse mostly focuses on the general being "decorated" with "many medals of bravery and stripes to his name." From the song's beginning, we see that the general's legacy is defined by war; and, as war inevitably means death, the general's legacy is defined by the deaths he has caused. Still, the general is somehow known for his "heart of gold." How can a man responsible for deaths have a heart of gold? Dispatch seems to suggest that war heroes often acquire glory through war, but this overshadows the fact that they were required to kill in the first place. The general's respectable reputation implies that people value glory enough to kill for it. 

     The chorus of "The General" begins to talk about the ethical problems with war. The general realizes these problems through a dream, leading him to tell his soldiers, "I have seen the others and I have discovered that this fight is not worth fighting." It seems that his dream showed him the perspective of "the others," who are presumably the enemy army. This makes the general realize that the battle "is not worth fighting," not because they're likely to lose, but because the accolades of war aren't worth the deaths of other men. The general also announces, "I have seen their mothers," which suggests that he's remembered that the opposing soldiers are real people with mothers and families, too. Dispatch's message is that war desensitizes people to killing, and remembering the humanness of others can help bring peace.

     However, the general's message doesn't bring peace. Instead of packing their weapons and going home, the soldiers stand still, "not knowing what to do with the contradicting orders" while "their eyes gazed straight ahead." Thinking of this image, I see an army of robots. The soldiers are unable to comprehend the orders to surrender, much like robots unable to process a certain command. Dispatch uses this verse to convey the message that war conditions people to only know war; the soldiers in the song seem to be machines who are literally unable to think about peace. As a result, the general "then prepared to fight." This last line sadly admits that war is only natural for people. Even if we try to make peace like the general in the song, war comes much easier to us. "The General" reflects a sad trend: people put fighting for a cause above human lives. Don't we see this in history all too often?