1. How do we find a balance between free speech and hate speech on the internet? Should all websites have a moderator to censor content that is unfit for viewing?
In my opinion, anybody can post anything anonymously over the internet, therefor therefor there really isn't a need to moderate it or censor it. If anybody has a problem with something on the internet, it's at their discretion to take action or react in any way to the content. If you see something you don't like, simply navigate away from it. I think anybody who takes sites like Reddit and Worldstarhiphop seriously really need to re-evaluate their life.
2. Should there be a law banning people from uploading videos of abuse and illegal acts?
There is no need to create a law for that, because it's at the website's/government's discretion. Sites like youtube have their own policies for keeping videos like that off, and videos that are against laws such as child porn get removed by the government anyways.
3. Does having sites like Worldstarhiphop and Reddit do anything to add to our culture and society or they simply a reflection of the darkest part of our society?
Reddit is a board/imageboard that allows people to congregate and discuss different topics, and anybody can use it. It is no way a reflection of the darkest part of our society, it reflects all parts of our society, and can lead to things which add to different parts of our culture. Worldstarhiphop on the other hand, is a video sharing site moderated by immature and un-educated clowns. This isn't to say Worldstarhiphop doesn't add to our culture, but it adds in a negative way.
Wednesday, 20 February 2013
Tuesday, 12 February 2013
Adbuster Creation
Wednesday, 6 February 2013
Adbusters Unit Assignment
1. http://www.mcspotlight.org/campaigns/translations/trans_uk.html
2. This article criticizes McDonald's in every aspect, from exploiting workers, damaging the environment and promoting unhealthy food. To sum up the article, the writers believe that McDonald's is aiming for world domination, by suckling in children customers and undermining local communities.
3. I am very surprised by the information of this article. It's no secret that McDonald's is one of the least healthy and most prominent fast food chains. I didn't know that the animals were killed barbarically, because I believe I read or heard somewhere that they were human, although it makes more sense to imagine a bunch of cows on a conveyor belt to death. I also wasn't aware of all the horrible effects that McDonald's had on the environment, specifically with the clearing of habitats to raise cows.
4. I think I could change the original intent of any McDonald's product by showing an obese person eating it, because it points out how unhealthy McDonald's products really are. I really agree with this article, because McDonald's is promoting unhealthy food to a younger audience. This will lead to lifestyle habits, so many future generations will be unhealthy unless they learn to change or this stops.
5.
6.
2. This article criticizes McDonald's in every aspect, from exploiting workers, damaging the environment and promoting unhealthy food. To sum up the article, the writers believe that McDonald's is aiming for world domination, by suckling in children customers and undermining local communities.
3. I am very surprised by the information of this article. It's no secret that McDonald's is one of the least healthy and most prominent fast food chains. I didn't know that the animals were killed barbarically, because I believe I read or heard somewhere that they were human, although it makes more sense to imagine a bunch of cows on a conveyor belt to death. I also wasn't aware of all the horrible effects that McDonald's had on the environment, specifically with the clearing of habitats to raise cows.
4. I think I could change the original intent of any McDonald's product by showing an obese person eating it, because it points out how unhealthy McDonald's products really are. I really agree with this article, because McDonald's is promoting unhealthy food to a younger audience. This will lead to lifestyle habits, so many future generations will be unhealthy unless they learn to change or this stops.
Monday, 4 February 2013
Adbusters Spoof Ad
1. https://www.adbusters.org/content/joe-chemo-bed
2. The intended message of the company was to portray a cool/hip smoker, named Joe Camel. The spoof ad creates a more realistic portrayal of someone who smokes often, because he has lung cancer.
3. I think the spoof ad does a good job of making the company's original ad look bad, and would certainly make me question it.
4. I agree with the sentiment of the spoof for the most part, although some people with cancer or who know people with cancer may not appreciate it because it uses the disease as a weapon against the company. Cancer is a known side effect of smoking, so I think that the use of it is fair & just.
2. The intended message of the company was to portray a cool/hip smoker, named Joe Camel. The spoof ad creates a more realistic portrayal of someone who smokes often, because he has lung cancer.
3. I think the spoof ad does a good job of making the company's original ad look bad, and would certainly make me question it.
4. I agree with the sentiment of the spoof for the most part, although some people with cancer or who know people with cancer may not appreciate it because it uses the disease as a weapon against the company. Cancer is a known side effect of smoking, so I think that the use of it is fair & just.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)