Journal Entry-Magazines.

Go to a bookstore (not BYU’s) and look at the different magazines. Select one that appeals to a highly specialized audience (different from one of your own interests). Read through the magazine and based on the magazine’s content (including the advertisements) prepare a description of the magazine’s “typical reader.” Give specific examples to justify your generalization.

Well, as I was perusing (nice word usage?) The shelves of the Borders book store near where I work, I stumbled upon "Field and Stream" I am not really into hunting and I haven't fished for years so I guess it's safe for something that isn't that interesting to me. Flipping through it, I saw some interesting stuff. The focus of this particular issue was how to find and kill that "big buck" that all hunters dream of. Judgeing by the advertisments for camoflauge suits, nice scopes, and other hunting parephanelia, I would guess that the typical reader would be a 15 to 40 year old caucasian male. From the adds in the pictures and the way the articles were written, it was pretty obvious that that is the target audience. Articles such as the best photos of shot deer from the year before and a discussion on whether or not camo is needed in hunting, makes this magazine very specific in who it is targeting.



What impact will/has the electronic media have/had on the magazine industry?
The TV was HUGE in impacting the magazine industry, the internet... not so much. Most magazines you try to look up online have teaser content and are basically grolified ads for the magazine. I suppose if you could easily find full issues of magazines on the internet for free, it would be different. But as it is, people like to have their physical copy to carry around and to check out the pictures. It's nice to place a magazine in a dentists waiting room and in bathrooms as well. Harder to set out laptops...
I don't think that the internet as it is now will change the magazine industry much. Maybe one day our technology will advance such that we will have virtual magazines, but as for now I will still flip through the readers digest waiting for my eye doctor to see me.

About Text books...

Books

Which is better for text books, physical or electronic? Which for personal reading?
For textbooks in class I would certainly perfer textbooks most of the time. I like being able to read and highlight. I also like flipping back and forth quickly between sections of books. However, in certain courses, perhaps something like graphic design, an electronic book would be more helpful. I guess it really depends on the course, but 9 out of 10 times I'd rather have a physical book.
As far as personal books go, I will always be a fan of the physical product. I read everywhere, at the table, in the bathroom, during class, riding in the car, etc. I can because it needs no power source, you don't have to worry too much about damaging it, and it's easier to transport. I realize that there are devices like PDAs and IPHONES that are easy to take everywhere, but I just enjoy turning pages and feeling progress in reading.

Journal Entry # 2

Do negative stereotypes exist in the media today?

Too easy: YES.
Not a day goes by when I don't see something depicting women or minorities in a less than flattering light. And not just that, it seems that there is an active movement to present "reverse stereo types". Examples> Women as sexual prededors in control of their quarry, or powerful(often violent) minorities. Here's a sexist commercial playing up sexism, but really enforcing the stereotype in the meantime.




Is there really the possiblity of people immersing themeselves too much in the world of mass media? Too the point where they begin to tune out to the real world?
Also, sure.
I for example, listen to music roughly 8-10 hours a day. I can't work out without my IPOD. I also spend a huge amount of time on the internet. I have around 400 dvd's. The funny thing is, I'm not as absorbed as many of my friends. And there are certainly people who take it to the extreme. I had a roommate last semester who worked... and played World of Warcraft. He would do nothing else, he seldom slept, only ate fast or prepared food, and didn't even go to church.(much). At least he worked.
Here's an interesting (if kind of long) clip from an editorial about the World of Warcraft addictees.



So I guess the evidence speaks for itself.

Journal entry # 1

The communication model... Alrighty, so what's basically a textbook term for what happens between a medium of communication (TV, Newspapers, Internet, Radio, etc) and you, the audience. To amaze you all with my in depth knowledge of how this baby works, the senders are the medium. The receiver is you, or the audience. All messages are encoded by the medium, and then decoded by you upon perceiving the medium. How much shared meaning is determined by how much the audience understands the message that was intended by the medium. Between us and the medium, there is always "noise" This can be anything distracting, often other media. So here is how effective I think each media is according to this model:
Newspaper Article:
The medium is newspaper corporations, such as News Cooperation. The medium is the paper, but more specifically the articles. For example, the Christian Science Monitors story by Linda Feldmann about whether or not the media has any impact on the truthfulness of statements made by 08' presidential candidates.http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/09/18/media-truth-squads-and-the-%e2%80%9908-campaign-any-impact/ This article has a very specific target audience, the American public. The message is, (as far as I can decode) that not really. The message is expressed in text and people can decode them at leisure and there is little danger of the audience not understanding if they desire to because they have all the time they need. However, it is easy to be sidetracked from a newspaper article if something more interesting catches the eye, and (if I'm any indication) few people ever finish reading an article all the way through, limiting effectiveness of articles. Magazine Article:Magazines are sent by publishers to us, the audience. Some magazines have only a narrow, special interest audience. Magazine articles appeal to more senses because they are colorful and heavy with photos. Newspapers also have photos, but are usually less visually appealing than Magazines. The messages of magazines are seemingly easier to convey to the passerby. It is easier and quicker to assimilate a magazine article than a newspaper article.
Radio Program:
A radio program sender is a broadcast company, and this auditory message is easy to decode. The channels are all of the frequencies on our radios, and the messeges are broad. Noise can (in addition to other things) be actual noise in this case.
TV Program:
Shares many of the same strengths and weaknesses as radio. The added visual aspect is greatly impacting making it the most effective means(in my opinion) in entertaining the receivers. It appeals to more senses and more effectively transmits the message.

For informing people, I think that newspapers do the best job. They are widely believed to be credible, and if you take the trouble to read an article, you will usually remember it and believe it. For persuading, I think that radio is the most effective. It is more geared in content to persuading recievers and also people feel a pull when they hear an eloquent speaker laying out well organized points. (I think that most radio broadcasters speak better than thier TV counterparts because of the limitations in thier medium).
So there you have it, all of my thoughts on the communication model.

Good grades.

Well,
This is just a sample post for all of the genius things that will follow...
Really, they will be.
Anywho, I'll throw some good media articles and analyzation on here and hopefully get good grades.