Many Media circles have deemed this attack as an attack on Freedom of expression by neo-Nazis, which is a great way to put a spin on the issue, because it makes the connotation about the people who did this, and would support those attacks. I dont have to be a neo Nazi to be repulsed by these seemingly enlarged pornographic pictures masquerading as art. I can hear both sides of this argument, and how some might argue a typical American has been socially conditioned to think about sex as a “dirty” thing, though the attack happened in Sweden, one of the most tolerant countries in Europe.

I have seen some of Serrano’s art, and it seems overrated. Take “Piss Christ”, which has no distinguishable features other than the fact that the crucifix was placed in urine. Once the shock effect has gone, we see little substance for any important or redeeming art. Serrano’s exploitation of sex fetishes, brings to mind Marylin Manson’s ealry career as a controversial figure. I do not support the vandals, but I do not hold it against them. It is my bias, that I see these paintings as nothing more than pornography on display with the pretext of being called art.

Video of Vandals attack on Serranos work: http://www.livevideo.com/video/5EE428F2D2FD4E969990468D369C3480/nationalist-action-against-deg.aspx

            Radiohead recognizes the immense power of the internet, there is no doubt about that. It’s also doing something else than simply offering its content at a variable price, its basically cutting out the middleman of the music industry. It is rebelling against the publicity, and profit mongering that has made average price CDs soar to questionable prices. This is monumental in music history, because it’s an active experiment. Will people contribute a profitable amount on something that can be virtually bought for pennies? We won’t know until we see the sales figures after Oct 10^th, but the debate and anticipation still holds long before its release date.

            For years established and aspiring artists have had to go through varying record companies to reach the mainstream audience, what Radiohead is attempting, could mean a significant shift in the way the recording industry works. You don’t have to take economics to understand the significance of such a system, if it succeeds, would have on the Music industry. This marketing move will off course attract new listeners who can’t resist the almost free price tag, which is one of the most exciting and cunning ways in which the effect of this experiment can manifest itself.

We have to take into account the immense establishment that is Radiohead. Doing such an experiment shows that the band is financially secure to try such a daring move. I applaud Radiohead for their attempt to change the way things are done in the music industry. I am very excited to see if the experiment succeeds (makes a large profit) or fails, but I am equally excited to see if their new music is as enticing as their past works.  

That’s the basic story in a few lines, now the fallout that has ensued is tremendous. It seems pretty silly when we read what all the fuzz is about, but when you put yourself in the situation of an officer who’s just received a bomb threat at an airport, it’s not something you would take so lightly. I can’t say I’m much displeased with the actions of the police were during the event, but I don’t condone their speech after it. The whole “ and shes lucky to be in a cell instead of a morgue.” Pretty much shows an emotional charged official that may let his feelings get in the way of his work.

I don’t think it’s apparent that a motherboard attached to a sweatshirt is an obvious bomb threat, if you see a picture of it seems pretty poor quality from what you’d expect from a MIT student. All these people who say you should censure yourself post 9/11 seem to be taking this to far. Fake bomb was not the first thing that came to mind when I saw the sweatshirt, it looks stupid was the first thing.

In post 9/11 it seems many things that we took for granted have become taboo or unthinkable now, and I have to agree (to an extent) with those who say we shouldn’t let the terrorist win, by succumbing to this fear mongering are right.

I’m going to close with a quote thats been on my mind by Benjamin Franklin it goes “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” it seems that were slowly making this trade off.

There has been much talk over the new proposed law in Atlanta, the one that prohibits citizens to show their underwear in public, with threats of a $500 fine and community service. Some see it as an infringing of First amendment rights, while others see it as a practical solution to create better citizens. The line is drawn at whether, the government should be allowed to censure the way people dress.

I will admit, at first glance I thought the proposed law was excellent, not only do you make people dress semi properly, but you also get extra revenue. I have a bias towards the displeasing style in question, but I do not let my biases get in the way of a good point. I started to hear the opinions of others on the subject. Soon freedom of expression was one of the most shinning examples as to why this law has negative overtones.

After all that is what separated us from the communist, freedom. Freedom to dress, eat, and associate yourself with whomever you like. This proposed law is very much ill convinced, and diverts attention on more serious subjects. I’m pretty sure the state has more important issues to deal with than a poor fashion sense. People throughout the generations have had a certain rebellious style, that contradicted their elders, from long hair and leather jackets to tattoos and piercings, and this wave of baggy ‘gansta’ style dress code is no different. If we can isolate and restrict these styles, then maybe we can ban, (and I say this knowing it might sound offensive) obese women from wearing thongs, or spandex, or if they do, we might just have to evaluate where their life is heading (right Trenton?) the more I go on the more ridiculous it sounds, doesn’t it? That’s what I soon concluded about the proposed law.

The truth of the matter is that there are varying degrees of self expression, to impose and restrict one, is to favor and even threaten the others. The individuals are only emulating what they have learned from popular culture of the time, to truly strike at the core of this trend, you would have to start with what you choose to represent.

As for other social networking sites, I recently got a facebook, its empty and abandoned cause I find little use for it, but ill get around to it. The only other site that I once liked was Xanga, I treated it like my public diary, I mean journal! It was short lived though, maybe a few posts but like a real journal updating and writing down my thoughts and stuff just wasn’t my thing.

So these are probably the largest factors in my membership in social sites; peer pressure, curiosity, and self expression/indulgence

Hello all, this is my first blog and I am dedicating it to an interesting ad I found. The ad depicts a typical XXX showplace at night, in what one presumes is a questionable neighborhood, this presumption supported by the darkness of night, and the unkept conditions of the area. Now the twist to this ad is in the neon lights, which states “GIRLS GIRLS GIRLS” and depicts a young child holding a toy. The message then reads “If it were this obvious we wouldn’t need your help. Florida Coalition Against Human Trafficking”

I found this a fantastic ad, in that it was very direct to its intended audience. As people we respond to these visual stimulants with repulsive apprehension of the situation. This off course derives from the negative connotation that XXX places hold in American society (somehow pornography is still a multi billion dollar industry), taken further by the exploitation of children for sexual pleasure. This ad also communicates to the general public at a basic human level, that of protecting their young, and of children’s innocence. These stir the human emotions and leave an imprint in the intended audience, which is a positive consequence that the Coalition is looking for. The text supports the visuals in its blunt statement. The ad does well in appealing to both men and women, though maybe women might have a more judgmental take on their male counterparts. Overall I think the ad delivers fairly well, on a serious topic.

Sources:

http://adsoftheworld.com/media/print/florida_coalition_against_human_trafficking_girls_girls_girls

http://www.forbes.com/2001/05/25/0524porn.html