Media Schemedia...

This week's blog entry will be based on the article below, featured on the Today paper on Friday, 17th October 2008:

Click on the image to get the readable pdf version

Yeeap, you've guessed it, this week we're going to discuss about the media, focusing a bit more on its traditional forms, the newspaper, television and radio, but not forgetting its upcoming and new form, the Internet, as well.

As usual, I'd appreciate it if the article above is given a good read before proceeding on,to better understand my entry this week.

So after reading the article above, the first thing that came to my mind was what was Today's purpose of having a full, three-articled page dedicated to re-inforce the statement that "traditional" media, speficially MediaCorp's "traditional" media offerings, is still the first choice? In other words, what was Today's agenda?

Agenda Setting is defined as the media's ability through repeated news coverage, to raise the importance of an issue in the public's mind.

I think this page from Today is a pretty good example of the agenda setting function of the media.
Notice how all the articles put MediaCorp's media offerings in a good light? Every MediaCorp offering is repeatedly backed by figures from the creditable Nielsen Media Index.
Furthermore, each article aligns it's core point to the same issue: That traditional media is still relevant and the most widely accepted form of media. Skeptical of my claims? Let me pick two examples from the article to prove my point:

"Despite stiff competition,the latest Nielsen Media Index found that Today’s readership grew to 621,000, up from the590,000 recorded last year.In fact, over the past five years, Today, whose editorial tagline reads “We set youthinking” has seen its readership grow by 43 per cent." - This is from the left-most article.

"This continued dominance of traditional media — despite the appeal of cyberspace and cable television— has been once again borne out by the latest Nielsen MediaIndex 2008, released yesterday.
And MediaCorp, with its extensive offerings, has done well across a range of platforms, with Today emerging as the second most widely-read newspaper here andChannel NewsAsia the top television channel watched by PMEBs(professionals, managers, executives and businessmen) and those earning $5,000 or more"- This is from the 1st article on top.

Try finding other statements from the remaining two articles that support my claims, and you'll see a recurring and similar pattern.

So let's go back to my original question..what again is Today's agenda then?

One can only speculate, but I think, what Today is trying to do is not only to "champion" all of MediaCorp's traditional media offerings, but remind its readers of the pervasiveness and relevance of traditional media in spite of the rise of the Internet. If you'd let me indulge in some cynicism, I also think it's really not unlike a desperate move to try convince and re-capture readers who have substituted a big chunk of their meida consumption with the Internet.

However, I do agree somewhat that traditional media is still relevant and still play an important role in our daily lives; a lot of people still do read newspapers, a lot of us still consume productions shown by the local tv stations, and the radio is still listened to by many especially those who drive to their workplace. It's just that I feel traditional media may not neccessarily be the automatic first choice for a lot of us, now that the Internet has become so widely and easily accessible.

What do YOU think Today's agenda is? Do YOU believe that traditional media is still the first choice of our media consumption?

Bollywood + Hollywood = Jollygood ?!

For this week's entry, let me bring everyone's attention to a ChannelNewsAsia article released today:

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/entertainmentfeatures/view/382103/1/.html


Please spend some time to read it before continuing on with my entry.

In summary, the article discusses Bollywood's ever increasing presence in the global entertertainment scene and how it plans to reach out to a more global audience in the future through better scripts and technology, to be more on par with their Hollywood counterparts.

My question is then, " Is Bollywood trying to go more in the way of Hollywood? And ultimately shed its unique style as perceived by the rest of the world?"

But what is the prevailing perception/stereotype of Bollywood's movie styles and cinematography? The following clip, in my opinion, best reflects the global perception, especially that of the West, of Bollywood:

This clip is taken off a scene in a popular American comedy show off Comedy Central, whilst it really is entertaining and will probably tickle of your funny bones senseless(as it did mine!..heh), the more pertinent issue that I'm bringing forth is, "Is that all there is to Bollywood?" i.e the dance, the cheesy romantic acts,the coconut trees and the songs?

I'm sure there are many stellar and serious Bollywood movies out there but yet, what stands out most and unique to Bollywood movies in general is their lengthy integration, and sometimes unneccessary inclusion, of song and dance into the plot.

Sure, there are Western musical movie types like Moulin Rouge and the more recent Mamma Mia!, but it's just not the same when compared to Bollywood movies. The inclusion of song and dance is almost a staple for most Bollywood productions.

From that alone, we can discern the entertainment worth and tastes of the Bollywood audience and the difference in culture in Indian entertainment media when say compared to the American media where the film style is more direct; without breaks for song and dance.

So, while I am all for better scripts and technology, and Bollywood's determination of having the global audience take it more seriously, I certainly hope that Bollywood doesn't lose its unique appeal just for the sake of pandering to the Hollywood crowd.

That said, I cannot help but remember this really funny viral video circulated on youtube some time back which shows, rather negatively in my opinion, the direct consumption of Hollywood media (Michael's Jackson's short music video/film thingey..i won't spoil the surprise) into the Bollywood (or rather Kollywood, which is the term referred to the Southern Indian movie industry, a big thank you to Shankar,a personal friend, for the heads up!) context. Do note that the video is a parody of the actual clip and that none of the lyrics subtitled actually represent the actual words sang:

Author's note: No offense to any of my Indian counterparts in COM101 and all my indian friends; I thoroughly respect and appreciate popular Indian entertainment. I am just trying to bring my points across by adding some elements of entertainment with these clips. I hope to not have offended anyone; and if you do find outrageously funny Malay clips, I'm always open to ridicule and criticism =) After all, if we don't learn to laugh at ourselves, we won't ever learn to be tolerant of others. =)

Mirror mirror on the..body?..

For this week's entry, as I was once again browsing the interweb for material to discuss/show on the blog, I stumbled upon this 2 week-old clip on Veoh.com on an aspect of body language or kinesics called mirroring. Take a look here:


Watch Body Language: Mirroring in How to Videos View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com

Apparently, this "mirroring" technique is an effective (as claimed by the expert, not me!) non verbal cue to actually make people like you just that wee bit more..

The basic idea is that when meeting other people, to make them more receptive to you, what you need to do is to try and take note of their body language and then try to mimic them ..and... more often than not the ensuing communication proccess would be an enjoyable one as the person you're communicating with would feel more at ease with you.. It's like what the expert says at 00:36 "..it's difficult to be mean to yourself.."

Most of the time, I think what you would be mirroring would be adaptors which are defined as
"behaviors that people use to adapt to stresses and to satisfy personal needs."

And yes, I think "mirroring" does make some sense if adaptors come into play. For example if you are meeting someone new, there is bound to be some sort of stress or anxiety, and people have their own adaptors which they unconciously will display because of that. By mimicking them, you're essentially and very discreetly also informing them through your body language that , "Hey, you're not the only one who's scared or anxious. I am too!", and by behaving similarly to them, it reinforces some sense of familiarity to the other person and could help to dissipate and lessen any tension or anxiety.

So the next time you want to hit it off with someone or trying to persuade your boss for a pay raise..try to look out for certain body language clues like adaptors or certain affect displays..and subtlely mimic these nonverbal cues..who knows you might actually make a new friend or get that much sought after promotion..