Rethink YouTube with Rethink Homelessness

According to YouTube's statistics page there are more than one billion users watching and uploading videos every month. On top of that, 6 billion hours of youtube are watched monthly. If these numbers aren't alarming, they should be. While it has been evident for years that social media prevalence and usage is on the rise, as YouTube so cleverly points out, these current statistics average out to "almost an hour for every person on Earth" monthly. 

If nonprofit organizations such as Rethink Homelessness, located right here in Central Florida could capitalize on the potential presented by these statistics, it is quite possible that support for serious social problems would be the result. 

As you can see in the screenshot above, 4,990,042 individuals have watched this video. That's close to 5 million viewers! What Rethink Homelessness has done through the assistance of YouTube is create a strong image, or brand for their organization and campaign. According to Richard Waters and Paul Jones, in their essay titled, Using Video to Build an Organization's Identity and Brand: A Content Analysis of Nonprofit Organizations' YouTube Videos, this is one of the most important things that nonprofit organizations can do when trying to ignite social change. However, it is noted in this study that nonprofit's aren't currently capitalizing on their full potential. Check out the full youtube video from Rethink Homelessness below!

What do you think about their message and strategy? Would you remember Rethink Homelessness because of this video? I know I do!

Fifty Shades of Ideology and Patriarchy

The Fifty Shades of Grey trilogy, by EL James,  have become recognized world wide and are now on the cusp of becoming even more popular with the first novel, Fifty Shades of Grey's debut as a movie. 

With the film's debut looming predominately women and adolescent girls from around the globe are getting more and more excited and even choosing to see it's premiere over the traditional valentine's date night. 

However, do all women know what they are actively buying into in fantasizing about and praising these novels and film? As this week's reading pointed out, the problem with romance novels is that while the specifics of the female-male relationships may be diverse, the "patriarchal attitudes and structures" (Radway 1983, 53) are not. Even in the film's trailer, in less than 2.5 minutes, "a women's journey to happiness and fulfillment" is constructed under the guidance obedience of a man. So as we devour the text's of this fiction, is it disgust and anger that we unearth, or has capitalism and ideology won once more with feelings of desire, praise and lust for the plot-line? 

As many scholarly researches have noted, the link between romance fiction, patriarchy and capitalism is great. However, one researcher, Jeanne Dubino, term's it best as the "Cinderella complex" in their essay on how popular culture constructs romance. There is a formula for romance novels and it can be traced back to patriarchy, masculinity, obedience and wealth. 

Radway, Janice. "Women Read the Romance: The Interaction of Text and Context." Feminst Studies 9, no. 1 (Spring 1983): 53-78.

Dubino, Jeanne. "The Cinderella Complex: Romance Fiction, Patriarchy and Capitalism." Journal of Popular Culture 27, no. 3 (Winter, 1993): 103. http://ezproxy.rollins.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/195367562?accountid=13584.

Understanding Satire: How Can We Take South Park Seriously?

I've always hated South Park. 

My opinion was based off of my viewing South Park as mindless and just plain stupid. However, after processing Ted Gournelos' article, "Blasphemous Allusion," I find myself wondering how often political satire and the oppositional culture that South Park plays off of is simply missed by viewers. I wonder at what level of consciousness one must critically observe the show to catch the intended messages. I previously found the content rude, racist, sexist ect., which I now attribute to perhaps me missing the satirical undertone and opportunity to critically challenge common discourse and ideologies that our culture allows. Gournelos points out, "it is impossible to say that any allusive production will reach viewers 'correctly'" (Gournelos 2009, 145). So the question becomes, how do we take South Park seriously? My answer would be by beginning to understand it's satirical content. If we are to understand the show through it's satirical power though, Gournelos' observation in which he explains how South Park "self consciously opposed censorship," (Gournelos 2009, 145) must remain true. A University of Oregon's communication scholar, Lauren Bratslavsky, further explained in her essay on Satire TV that "taking apart satire leads to understanding humor's critical capacity to attack and disarm its subjects" (2010, 678) just as this uncensored end scene of South Park, Episode 201 allows. 

As opposed to the censored episode, which actually appeared on Comedy Central.

 Which seems to me, to go against the entire concept and philosophy of South Park.

Bratslavsky, Lauren. 2010. "Satire TV: Politics and Comedy in the Post-Network Era." Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 87 (3): 678-680. http://ezproxy.rollins.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/819075773?accountid=13584.

Gournelos, Ted. 2009. "Blasphemous Allusion: Coming of Age in South Park." The Journal of Communication Inquiry 33 (2): 143-168. http://ezproxy.rollins.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/215855582?accountid=13584.