Response to Virtual Life vs. Reality

When I came across the blog Dreamlover, I felt connected to Allie's points because I have personal experience with her Webkinz example. My sisters and I all had a Webkinz pet when we were younger. The website was very addicting and was very time consuming. We felt that it was a way to connect with our friends at school. We were usually one of the few in our classes who did not have dogs or pets in our classes, so whenever our classmates and friends would talk about their pets we would feel excluded. We saw Webkinz as a way to feel included. Taking care of Webkinz pets were pretty similar to taking care of a real life pet without having to clean up its feces or take it on walks. In order to receive money, one must play games to do so, and then use the money to buy food. I feel like this can teach children the responsibility associated with taking care of not only pets but also humans and the value of money. This view is slightly skewed because of the means of getting Webkinz which is by paying money to buy a new pet each year. The value of social interaction can also be taught through virtual communities. Fantasy football is a way to build relationships with other people. However, these relationships are mainly in the context of the virtual community. Sole dependence on the virtual community can introduce the threat of replacing real-life communities with the virtual ones. This would cause people to become very secluded and not experience life. I do believe that this is beneficial for people to have these virtual communities to have a quick getaway from the world. It is advisable to be cautious on how far these interactions go.

 

The Push for Social Change through Media

Media definitely has its pros and cons. However, what the individual takes from any of the sources is completely up to his or her discretion. Someone can advise another someone on what to read, but it depends on what the individual does with that advice. People in the 18^th and 19^th century did not believe women were capable of making their own decisions and that they were easily influenced by what they read or saw. Novelists such as Jane Austen did not believe this and lampooned this belief in Northanger Abbey. She believed that women are people and have the ability to discern between what is beneficial and what is detrimental to their well-being. The television program phenomenon Glee exemplifies Jane Austen’s belief to an extent. The producers are trying to influence its viewers what to think which is slightly against Austen’s belief. The producers believe that its viewers will be influenced by the scenes on the show. Glee critiques political conservatism bluntly and harshly in season 3. Some critics argue that the people who watch Glee are prone to believe what is being stated on the show, but it is influencing the viewers to think that conservatism is wrong. However, the producers are shaping us to become more critical of our society and the events and laws that affect society. Through the incorporation of bullying, Glee producers try to suggest ways for bullied victims to deal with bullying and how society is supposed to deal with it. In essence, I believe that the importance of media is to create critical citizens in order to push for social change. The originality of each individual’s mind is important in creating new ideas. New ideas should flow back and forth from the producers of media to the consumers of media. In order to flow back to producers, the consumers have to be able to decide for themselves what the television show, novel, or movie means to them and offer their suggestions.

The Allure of the Media's Influence

Are people influenced by the media? To what extent? Is this a benefit or setback for society? No matter how philosophical critics become with these questions there will almost never be a definite answer to this timeless question.  I hope to provide an answer that is close to certain. Conduct writers of the late 18^th and early 19th century such as John Gregory and Hester Chapone thought that books such as Gothic ones would influence girls to have a skewed view of reality. They advised to steer away from books that evoke irrational imaginations and behaviors. To some extent this is true. However, I do believe that people need to broaden their perspectives on life. The spreading of ideas is necessary for society. These so called Gothic or adventure novels usually have hidden meanings and it is useful to discover the meanings in order to learn something new about a culture or society as a whole. On the other hand, I do believe that it is possible for people to be influenced by film, television, and books in positive and negative ways. However, it is the individual’s prerogative as to which sources of media he or she is exposed to. Who is to decide what is wrong or dangerous to expose an individual besides the person? Some sources of media may be relevant to that person’s life. Whether it reminds the person of horrific events or pleasant events will influence how he or she reacts. For example, the issue of whether children should be allowed to listen to rap music has been up in the air for some time. People against rap music argue that rap will influence children to engage in such activities because it is glorified on television (with the music videos) and in the songs. So the bigger question regarding the rap music industry is whether the songs are born out of participation in this violence or from voices advocating for change in the communities depicted. To what extent are each of these sides true? Honestly, it depends on the person (rapper). Some rappers come from these neighborhoods and go on to receive an education. In order to raise awareness about these communities, they decide to express the events through their music. Some rappers might participate in violence indirectly through their actions towards other people. This is why parents are reluctant to allow their children to listen to rap. An example of how media influences people in negative ways is the shooting in Aurora, Colorado. The shooter was obsessed with the Batman series, more specifically with Joker. So he decided to begin behave like the Joker in Batman and begin shooting everyone in sight. He did not even consider the humanity of others when he decided to carry out his plan. This is clearly a dangerous consequence of media’s influence but I do believe there are other underlying factors that can cause someone to believe the violence they see in movies and television are true. For instance, an individual could have psychological issues that skew their view of reality in general. So is it safe to blame maladaptive behavior on media or the mind and environment?