Celeb Status.

What defines a celebrity these days?  It used to be how talented and artistic one individual was and how they used those attributes to entertain or expose towards a range of people, but now “celebrities” are popping up everywhere as a means of selling themselves to the media. Maybe intentionally or un-intentionally, but a “celebrity” is able to be any house-hold name famous or infamous.

Celebrities hide behind a front, a front in which they compose as they are conscious of the public version of themselves. New media and the paparazzi create celebrities as a public personality that are exploited to the world.

New media can be identified as the current online culture which  allows different flows of messages, media and images to circulate. Through the use of Twittersphere, Facebook and all social networking sites, celebrity status is more exposed than ever before.  ‘Celebrity culture is explicitly the extra-textual version of public individuals’ (Marshell, 2012), meaning that celebrities live in a fabricated world as ‘we’ the audience make their popularity. And as easily as we give them fame we can take it back at any time. The power of the media gives celebrities their recognition which is why celebrities ‘pose and present a mask of the self for public consumption’ (Marshell, 2012).

Within the new media, paparazzi tend to exploit celebrities in their most individual way. Paparazzi use intercommunication to capture the individual then exchange through social networks to conduct a movement between the personal and the highly mediated.

Examples of celebrities expressing ‘normal’ lives can be seen through resent events such as the nude photos of our dear Prince Harry or paparazzi capturing the iconic sweet heart Kirsten Stewart cheating on Rob Patterson.

Events like this are more dramatic because they are public figures. So why do we put these people on high pedestals? Is it so when they fail it makes us feel better about our flaws?

References

-          Marshell, D 2012, ‘ALC Globalisation and the Media Week 8’ , Celebrity and the Public Persona

YOU!tube

The internet is such an overwhelming sensation these days that any average Jo is able to become a super star overnight. Through the use of uploading videos or images, people are able to project their talents or lack of, to express themselves in such a public manner. YouTube has become the main force to venture peoples public opinion, abilities and to an extent stupidity to the whole world. Broadcasting these days isn’t just limited to media watchdogs and current affairs, but as globalisation has developed so has the need to broadcast.

‘Broadcasting is to transmit programs to make something widely known or to disseminate something’ ( Naficy, 2003, pp.51-62), and that is exactly what the phenomenon of YouTube is allowing publics to do. On YouTube people are able to find virtually any type of entertainment, whether it is music videos from famous celebrities to notorious civilians that upload their opinion on matters that really aren’t necessary.  A classic example of YouTube popularity can be seen when in 2004 the ‘Numa Numa Guy’ was the most watched clip having over 1million views that year.

Through broadcasting in such a commercial way the ‘Numa Numa Guy’ (Gary Brolsma) was instantly a YouTube sensation and almost 10 years later his video and face is still recognised worldwide.

Also YouTube allows the purpose of narrow casting to direct all its audience to one specific demographic which can be categorised as ‘YOU’. ‘Narrow casting aims a program or programming at a specific, limited audience’ (Naficy, 2003, pp.51-62), meaning that the majority of watches and audience of YouTube is ‘you’, ‘us’ as a nation and globe we are the aimed audience.

References

-          Naficy, H 2003, ‘Narrowcasting in diaspora: Middle Eastern television in Los Angeles’, The media of diaspora 2003, Routledge, London, pp 51-62

Aussie Pride!

How can anyone criticise or be racial to any other culture or religion for living in Australia and not adapting to ‘being Australian’?  What is Australian?

What sets our Aussie identity apart from any other culture?

According to Srivastava (2008) ‘national identity is perhaps one of the most ‘naturalised’ of all types of identities. It is assumed to be obvious, apparent, and historically authentic’. Australia is initially made up of immigrants and people from overseas, so what makes us, AUSTRALIANS, have authenticity?

Through the use of globalisation we have been portrayed and identified through characteristics in which other countries have labelled us with.

Can it be the way our accent is so distinctive, our “G’day mate” or maybe it’s our references to our “bogan” way of life. How can we call ourselves an ‘Aussie Battler’ if we have trouble trying to identify who we are as a nation? 

We have this reputation of a wild, carefree Australian lifestyle and this is able to be evident through the way we are portrayed within other cultures.

Let’s take for example, Australians within Bali at the Full Moon party; our youth is to be expressed all around the world as uncontrollable, irresponsible and plain right ‘acting as Aussie do’.

Even with in films, how we are able to identify an Australian character is usually through them having a heavy, outback accent and surfy appearance. But in Australia we do not all look like that as we are made up of a lot of different cultures due to nationalism.  ‘Nationalism is becoming less an ideology of the nation-state and more a personal project motivated and sustained by the desire of post national diasporic individuals’ (Sun,2002: 132).

As Aussie we are proud of our country, but what are we really proud of?

References

-          Sun, 2002 , 132 ( from handed out sheet)

-          Birch, D, Schirato, T & Srivastava, S 2001, Asia: cultural politics in the global age, Allen and Unwin, Sydney.

public sFAIR?

As a nation, we are not only multi-cultural but we acknowledge all religions and accommodate to those religious needs. Australia is made up of different ethnic groups as a result of diaspora. Diaspora is when people move and take their culture with them; again this can be more simplified into a word commonly known as immigration.  To create a visual, I am going to revolve this specific blog around people from the Middle East moving into Australia.

Australia has had to adapt to welcome comfortably all nationalities, so much so that by having to adjust to make them feel comfortable the country has had to make sacrifices. ‘Globalisation is not simply a trend or a fad but is, rather, an international system; Globalisation has its own rules and logic that today directly or indirectly influence the politics, environment, geopolitics and economics of virtually every country in the world’ ( Hatchen & Scotton, 2002) .

For an example of how drastic Australia has had to accommodate our visitors and future residences, can be seen within our fun park in Queensland, Movie World, which has built a mosque so that Muslims are able to pray. By Catholics being the most dominant religion within Australia, why isn’t there a church within an Australian theme park?

The fashion of diaspora revolves around the evolution of public sphere, and the public sphere changes because of diaspora. Hatchen & Scotton (2002) claim ‘the rapid integration of the world’s economy has been facilitated by an information revolution driven by communication’. This communication has to do with the evolving change because of how the way the world evolves due to public sphere.

                

References

-     -     Hatchen, WA & Scotton, JF 2002, ‘ The world news prism: global media in an era of terrorism’, 6th edn, Iowa State Press, Ames, pp. 3–14.

-

Power Of the Media

Within the 21st century we are more influenced by the media than ever before. Not only with the expansion and development of the internet are we more in tuned with the mass media but the dominance expressed regarding hegemony is overbearing.

Steven (2003) states that ‘hegemony is achieved when the power of the dominant groups in a society appear natural’ indicating that hegemony forms a power or rule not limited to direct political control but those who have power maintain their position through the creation of a world view.

Let’s take the effect of the current globalised event of the Olympic Games, this has influenced the whole world and has become a fight for gold rather than countries coming together, to experience and be a part of something great. The media have made the Olympics something to cater for all athletes egos.

Hegemony is apparent in having a medal tally. Why do we have a medal telly? Because those in powerful positions are ‘communicating the viewpoint of the ruling elites’ (Steven, pp.52-3). These dominant elites are America, Australia and China so they feel empowered above all.

At the moment the media are portraying our athletes to be somewhat of a failure if they do not get gold medals. Who says that silver or bronze is not a triumph, and who says that even just being a competitor within an event is not an achievement in its self?

Mass media empowers our view points as the term itself implies ‘a homogenous audience that will receive, consume or be affected by’ (Steven, p.37).

This can be seen through how our dominant media outlets (Channel nine and FOXTEL) that are currently broadcasting the Olympics choose to avoid showing our athletes failing and choose what their audience receive in order to consume and be affected in a certain way.

So why are our depended media outlets not highlighting in a great extent on the achievements of our athletes but focusing deeply on how disappointing it is not to get a gold.

Hegemony and the mass media influence their audience to feel dissatisfied with our athlete’s attempts when in reality we should embrace our countries successes.

References

-         -  Steven, P 2003, ‘Political economy: the howling, brawling, global market place’, The no-nonsense guide to the global media, New Internationalist, Oxford, pp. 37–59

-       -    ( http://equella.deakin.edu.au/deakin/file/ca1d6f6f-1974-4f3c-4ce0-380ddfd88f14/1/scan-politicaleconomy-steven-2003.pdf )