My five-year-old opened her first Disney gaming account this morning - actually my husband opened it for her. We entered her birthdate, first name, and my husband's e-mail address (which is all Disney can legally ask for since she is under the age of 12).
She went on to design her own "fairy" through a Tinkerbell game and then was asked if she wanted to play some games or go shopping..... wait, what??????
Why is Disney asking my underage child if she wants to go shopping? Why not just tell her to go to mommy's purse and get my credit card and enter the info so she can buy anything she wants online?
Years ago the FCC did away with television ads that said "go ask your Mommy or Daddy to buy this item for you". Yet nothing is being done about online games telling our children to shop. I urge parents to contact your senators and congressmen to ask them to regulate online children's games.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Friday, February 13, 2009
Magazine assisted suicide - Newspapers helped to die at hands of media family member
In the April/May 2008 Green Issue of Ready Made magazine one of the tips regarding living green was to cancel newspaper subscriptions and instead get news from digital sources such as the New York Times online.
I find that this particular tip was a Kevorkian-style move from the magazine which could have assisted in the death of some newspapers across the country. What, may I ask, has this world come to when one media family member openly encourages the demise of another?
Here in Detroit in particular we have seen the demise of the 177-year-old Detroit Free Press as it scaled back home delivery (i.e., printing) of the newspaper to 3 days a week. Now it only prints on Thursday, Friday, and Sunday - but still offers online news 7 days a week. All over the country this is happening and it is dreadfully unfortunate.
I understand that new/emerging media often advance at the detriment to other media. We saw how telephone took away from telegraph, how television took away radio's audience, and how Internet mail has taken away from snail mail. But to openly encourage it? Blasphemous!
I would like to say to the editors of Ready Made magazine that they need to take a good hard look in the mirror.
I find that this particular tip was a Kevorkian-style move from the magazine which could have assisted in the death of some newspapers across the country. What, may I ask, has this world come to when one media family member openly encourages the demise of another?
Here in Detroit in particular we have seen the demise of the 177-year-old Detroit Free Press as it scaled back home delivery (i.e., printing) of the newspaper to 3 days a week. Now it only prints on Thursday, Friday, and Sunday - but still offers online news 7 days a week. All over the country this is happening and it is dreadfully unfortunate.
I understand that new/emerging media often advance at the detriment to other media. We saw how telephone took away from telegraph, how television took away radio's audience, and how Internet mail has taken away from snail mail. But to openly encourage it? Blasphemous!
I would like to say to the editors of Ready Made magazine that they need to take a good hard look in the mirror.
- Newsprint is more easily recycled than 4-color, glossy pages of a magazine like theirs.
- Most newsprint today is made with recycled paper while magazines use virgin pulp - contributing to the deaths of more trees.
- You can just as easily get an online edition of Ready Made magazine as you can get an online subscription to any major newspaper (yet they didn't point that out did they - I guess they still want to sell print versions of their own publication :).
If Ready Made truly was worried about green living they should have put themselves on the chopping block first. It is hypocritical for them to take aim at newspapers. And honestly, to PROMOTE the demise of a fellow media family member is just wrong.
Even Kevorkian doesn't go around saying he wants to off his sister.
Monday, December 1, 2008
God save us all
So, I don't usually post about the Lord....but here goes.
I recently worked on an NIH research grant through the University of Missouri School of Journalism PRIME (Psychological Research on Information and Media Effects) Lab on using cancer survivor narratives to encourage African American women to get mammograms. I got to watch 80+ hours of testimony from breast cancer survivors, their friends, and their family members, code it, cut it to 1 minute "bites" and pretest it for an experimental study on the effects of these messages.
While I was watching the videos I was amazed by the statements made by these amazing women. Almost every single one of them stated that they knew God would help them through their sickness. NOT A SINGLE ONE stated that she was mad a God for making her sick. In fact, several said that their faith was why they were sick - they said that God knew they were spiritually strong enough to handle it.
One woman stated that at first she questioned God, asking "Why me?" Her next question was, "Why not me?" She said she knew God would get her through everything... that she had faith that he was there for her. He got her through her mastectomy and her chemotherapy afterwards. She joked that she didn't need hair or a breast... one she had never liked and the other she had only used to hang shirts on.
She wasn't the only woman who joked while telling her story. Countless others smiled and "laughed off" what they had gone through. They all said that they knew God was going to help them through it so they didn't need to worry.
I can't tell you all how many tears I shed while I watched their moving stories. These women were truly amazing. I know if I had been diagnosed my statements to God would not have been so faithful or selfless. I would have been angry. I would have asked what I had done to deserve this. I would have probably given God a piece of my mind. I would not have said anything to the effect of "Why not me"?
Study after study has shown that the African American community responds to spiritual messages. Why? Because they have faith.... they KNOW (not feel or believe) that God will be there for them.
I am reminded of a story I heard after hurricane Katrina (which was probably not true) about a family that decided to stay in their house. Some police officers came to their neighborhood and said that buses were there for them to leave in. The family decided to stay, saying "God will get protect us."
The next day, when the flood waters covered their first floor they moved to the second story. Again, some police officers showed up to help them to safety using a boat. Again, the family decided to stay, saying "God will get protect us."
The next day, when the flood waters covered their second floor they moved up to the roof. Again, some police officers showed up to help them to safety using a helicopter. Again, the family decided to stay, saying "God will get protect us."
The next day the family died. When they met St. Peter at the Pearly Gates they asked why God hadn't saved them. St. Peter's response was that he had sent help - a bus, a boat, and a helicopter - and they had refused.
God does not always send the help we expect. The breast cancer survivors had to go through chemo, radiation, breast removal, etc. in order to survive cancer. God sent them doctors, nurses, and hospital staff to help them survive. He also gave them friends and family who took them to appointments, brought them food, and sat up with them when they were sick.
To these women having faith meant SEEING how God was going to help them through their cancer. It did not include saying, "I will get better on my own. I don't need a mammogram. I don't need to see a doctor."
I hope that we were able to capture the pieces of their stories that will be moving enough to convince others to get mammograms. I would like to know that I took part in a study that helped people not just to go through cancer, but to know that God is there for them.
To every woman over the age of 40 I urge you to see your doctor, get a mammogram, and have faith. God is watching over you.
I recently worked on an NIH research grant through the University of Missouri School of Journalism PRIME (Psychological Research on Information and Media Effects) Lab on using cancer survivor narratives to encourage African American women to get mammograms. I got to watch 80+ hours of testimony from breast cancer survivors, their friends, and their family members, code it, cut it to 1 minute "bites" and pretest it for an experimental study on the effects of these messages.
While I was watching the videos I was amazed by the statements made by these amazing women. Almost every single one of them stated that they knew God would help them through their sickness. NOT A SINGLE ONE stated that she was mad a God for making her sick. In fact, several said that their faith was why they were sick - they said that God knew they were spiritually strong enough to handle it.
One woman stated that at first she questioned God, asking "Why me?" Her next question was, "Why not me?" She said she knew God would get her through everything... that she had faith that he was there for her. He got her through her mastectomy and her chemotherapy afterwards. She joked that she didn't need hair or a breast... one she had never liked and the other she had only used to hang shirts on.
She wasn't the only woman who joked while telling her story. Countless others smiled and "laughed off" what they had gone through. They all said that they knew God was going to help them through it so they didn't need to worry.
I can't tell you all how many tears I shed while I watched their moving stories. These women were truly amazing. I know if I had been diagnosed my statements to God would not have been so faithful or selfless. I would have been angry. I would have asked what I had done to deserve this. I would have probably given God a piece of my mind. I would not have said anything to the effect of "Why not me"?
Study after study has shown that the African American community responds to spiritual messages. Why? Because they have faith.... they KNOW (not feel or believe) that God will be there for them.
I am reminded of a story I heard after hurricane Katrina (which was probably not true) about a family that decided to stay in their house. Some police officers came to their neighborhood and said that buses were there for them to leave in. The family decided to stay, saying "God will get protect us."
The next day, when the flood waters covered their first floor they moved to the second story. Again, some police officers showed up to help them to safety using a boat. Again, the family decided to stay, saying "God will get protect us."
The next day, when the flood waters covered their second floor they moved up to the roof. Again, some police officers showed up to help them to safety using a helicopter. Again, the family decided to stay, saying "God will get protect us."
The next day the family died. When they met St. Peter at the Pearly Gates they asked why God hadn't saved them. St. Peter's response was that he had sent help - a bus, a boat, and a helicopter - and they had refused.
God does not always send the help we expect. The breast cancer survivors had to go through chemo, radiation, breast removal, etc. in order to survive cancer. God sent them doctors, nurses, and hospital staff to help them survive. He also gave them friends and family who took them to appointments, brought them food, and sat up with them when they were sick.
To these women having faith meant SEEING how God was going to help them through their cancer. It did not include saying, "I will get better on my own. I don't need a mammogram. I don't need to see a doctor."
I hope that we were able to capture the pieces of their stories that will be moving enough to convince others to get mammograms. I would like to know that I took part in a study that helped people not just to go through cancer, but to know that God is there for them.
To every woman over the age of 40 I urge you to see your doctor, get a mammogram, and have faith. God is watching over you.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Media Coverage of Prominent Women
Is anyone else tired of how women are portrayed by the media?
The most prominent example of disparity right now is Sarah Palin. Politics aside, asking if she can do the job and still raise a family is SEXIST (and insulting). Suggesting that if she had stayed home and paid more attention to raising her kids than running Alaska then her 17-year-old wouldn't be pregnant is ridiculous. Has anyone told Dick Cheney that if he stayed home and paid more attention to his daughter that she wouldn't be gay? Has anyone told President Bush that if he stayed home and paid more attention to his girls they wouldn't have been caught drinking underage?
Hey media - if you wouldn't ask that question of a man.... then don't ask it of a woman. Have some standards and follow them! Have none of you ever seen the 2000 movie The Contender? If not then you should. It directly relates to this situation. A woman runs for vice president and the media start asking sexist questions - and making unfounded assumptions. Sound familiar?????
My next example of poor media coverage of a woman is more local. Those of you living in Detroit or Michigan in general know what I am talking about. The coverage of Christine Beatty in the local media is absolutely sexist. Week after week the media post beautiful, perfect, touch-up photos of ex-Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. I am assuming this is a "stock" photo released to the public of the Mayor.
The local media have access to the same type of "stock" photo of Beatty - yet they constantly run unflattering, harried, and downright ugly photos of Beatty. I understand the woman is charged with multiple violations and has not been the most forthcoming with information. But, the fact that the media uses DECENT, RESPECTABLE, and HANDSOME photos of Kilpatrick (who chose to step down and take his medicine) they should give the same to Beatty.
I am just asking for some gender equity here folks. Let's try and live in a new century and give both men and women the respect they deserve. If you aren't doing something to the men.... DON'T DO IT TO THE WOMEN!
The most prominent example of disparity right now is Sarah Palin. Politics aside, asking if she can do the job and still raise a family is SEXIST (and insulting). Suggesting that if she had stayed home and paid more attention to raising her kids than running Alaska then her 17-year-old wouldn't be pregnant is ridiculous. Has anyone told Dick Cheney that if he stayed home and paid more attention to his daughter that she wouldn't be gay? Has anyone told President Bush that if he stayed home and paid more attention to his girls they wouldn't have been caught drinking underage?
Hey media - if you wouldn't ask that question of a man.... then don't ask it of a woman. Have some standards and follow them! Have none of you ever seen the 2000 movie The Contender? If not then you should. It directly relates to this situation. A woman runs for vice president and the media start asking sexist questions - and making unfounded assumptions. Sound familiar?????
My next example of poor media coverage of a woman is more local. Those of you living in Detroit or Michigan in general know what I am talking about. The coverage of Christine Beatty in the local media is absolutely sexist. Week after week the media post beautiful, perfect, touch-up photos of ex-Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. I am assuming this is a "stock" photo released to the public of the Mayor.
The local media have access to the same type of "stock" photo of Beatty - yet they constantly run unflattering, harried, and downright ugly photos of Beatty. I understand the woman is charged with multiple violations and has not been the most forthcoming with information. But, the fact that the media uses DECENT, RESPECTABLE, and HANDSOME photos of Kilpatrick (who chose to step down and take his medicine) they should give the same to Beatty.
I am just asking for some gender equity here folks. Let's try and live in a new century and give both men and women the respect they deserve. If you aren't doing something to the men.... DON'T DO IT TO THE WOMEN!
Monday, August 11, 2008
Throwing the title "journalist" around...
This first posting discusses something I find truly difficult to stomach. Last night I saw an ad run by a local television station asking individuals to become "citizen journalists." Many of you probably know that professional journalists have a hard time coming to grips with the fact that what bloggers write has been referred to as journalism. For the most part, bloggers do not rely upon the journalistic tenents to write their posts - they simply write what they know/think/feel (just as I am doing now).
That said, I am extremely appalled at a professional news outlet (which I hope is staffed by professional journalists) asking citizens to become journalists. It demeans our profession and what we do. It says that anyone can write a little bit, post it online, and it's journalism.
Professional journalists (by this I mean those who have a journalism education, training, or background) don't refer to bloggers as journalists. It's not that we don't appreciate or understand what bloggers do (many of us are bloggers ourselves), it's just that we feel we have worked for and earned our title. We have gone through a process of researching, writing, interviewing, fact checking, and editing before submitting a story for production.
Journalism is a profession - a career choice - not something that is done for sport. It has a long and distinguished history. Many prominent writers, scholars, businesspeople, and ambassadors have been journalists. Some journalists feel so strongly about their profession that they have gone to jail to protect story sources. These individuals have indeed earned the right to be called a journalist.
The title of journalist is something to be aspired to, not just given. Simply writing about the day's news or events does not make one a journalist. In my opinion, writing a blog makes you a writer. Giving news ideas to the media makes you a source. Neither is a journalist. It would be like someone saying that because they put a bandaid on a wound or gave someone a Tylenol they are a citizen doctor.
That said, I am extremely appalled at a professional news outlet (which I hope is staffed by professional journalists) asking citizens to become journalists. It demeans our profession and what we do. It says that anyone can write a little bit, post it online, and it's journalism.
Professional journalists (by this I mean those who have a journalism education, training, or background) don't refer to bloggers as journalists. It's not that we don't appreciate or understand what bloggers do (many of us are bloggers ourselves), it's just that we feel we have worked for and earned our title. We have gone through a process of researching, writing, interviewing, fact checking, and editing before submitting a story for production.
Journalism is a profession - a career choice - not something that is done for sport. It has a long and distinguished history. Many prominent writers, scholars, businesspeople, and ambassadors have been journalists. Some journalists feel so strongly about their profession that they have gone to jail to protect story sources. These individuals have indeed earned the right to be called a journalist.
The title of journalist is something to be aspired to, not just given. Simply writing about the day's news or events does not make one a journalist. In my opinion, writing a blog makes you a writer. Giving news ideas to the media makes you a source. Neither is a journalist. It would be like someone saying that because they put a bandaid on a wound or gave someone a Tylenol they are a citizen doctor.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
