"Balloon Boy" and the "Party Crashers"

Do you ever feel like news story just wont go away. It is the topic of conversation on television, radio, and internet. Take for example the recent White House "party crashing" couple, the Salahis and the "balloon boy hoax" Heenes. Within hours the "balloon boy" story was all over social media sites, had jokes and parodies, was the number one search on Google (34 out of 40 searches were related to in incident), was referenced on Saturday Night Live, and the family was interviewed by Wolf Blitzer, Larry King, Good Morning America, and Today. We have yet to find out more statistics regarding the State Dinner party crashers, but from what I have seen it seems that we are headed in the same direction. These are interesting stories, by why are they so dominant in the media for three weeks straight? What is the obsession with stories like these and why are they so successful? What I also find amazing about these stories is how fast they spread around the world. The speed at which they go from news coverage, to social media sites, to radio, and eventually circulate in everyday conversation in almost every area of our lives from work, to school, to home, and with friends. Once the initial news comes out it doesn't go away for weeks and it dominates the media in every aspect. What are the ingredients that make these stories so appealing for such a prolonged period? I think that part of why these stories are so huge is because of the attention media gives it. It makes me wonder who is at fault, or if the media and the public are equally at fault. Would the public be as interested as they are if there was less coverage of them, or does the media give the public what they desire... stories like this. I think that people like the Heene and Salahis need to be ignored as much as possible. Fame seeking people will realize that 15 minutes of fame has now become three weeks of fame and we will continue to see more and more media stunts.

But then again, here I am blogging about it along with the rest of the world!

Comcast to Buy NBC?

CEO of NBC Universal, Jeff Zucker emailed employees in September regarding a possible sale of the company to Comcast. General Electric owns 80% of NBC while 20% is owned by Vivendi. In late September the buzz began about Comcast purchasing the media giant. CNBC reported that "the negotiations between Comcast and the entertainment company involved spinning off the unit into a new company, with Comcast taking 51 percent economic control of the company." GE would retain its 49% stake in the company. According to DailyFinance.com, Comcast provides service to 1/4 of American homes in 39 states. NBC consists of the television network, Universal Studios, MSNBC, CNBC, USA Network, Telemundo, the Weather Channel, Hulu.com, and more.

What will this merger do to independent media and programming diversity? According to Josh Silver of the Huffington Post, if the two merge, Comcast will then own a quarter of all cable channels. What will the repercussions of this vertical integration be?

Critique of “Examining the Influences of Telepresence on Spectator and Player Processing of Real and Fictitious Brands in a Computer Game"

The article was well organized. It stated the reason for the study, the methodology, and the results clearly. I found that the writing style for the literature review got to be a little wordy, and this made it a weak point in the article. It seemed like there was a lot of great information in the review, but the way it was worded made me loose track of the sentence’s meaning before getting to the end of it. Thus, having to do a lot a rereading. Given that the psychological effects of product placement in games has not been widely studied, the literature review DID do a good job of using research from film and television to legitimize and back-up game research. What I found to be the strongest part of this article was the clear explanation of all seven of the hypotheses and the research question. After the hypotheses were clearly stated, the results were also stated in the findings section along with the statistics that proved/disproved them. Because of the real brand, the fake brand, the player, and the watcher the 2 x 2 factorial design was a perfect way to study this subject and to explain the results. Given the fact that there were so many hypotheses, the findings section was great because they broke down each one into results for the player and the watcher, or the real and the fake brands. The methodology seemed to be solid, and whatever the researchers couldn’t account for in the actual study, they took into account for in their equations for the statistical results. In today’s society this research topic and article are very relevant. More and more people are playing video games and computer games. Having more research on this topic gives advertisers and companies more information to make good decisions on where, how, and if they are going to advertise in games. What I would like to see research on in the future is how variables such as age, gender, game genre, and type of product have any effect on product placement in games.

"Firefly Mobile: The Mobile Phone for Mobile Kids"

How young is too young for cell phones? When I was growing up it was very rare for a kid in middle school to have a cell phone, now it seems to be the standard. What has changed? Parents say that it is nice to be able to call and check in with their kids and it makes them feel safer knowing that their child has a cell phone. But ten years ago parents didn't feel unsafe because their child didn't have a cell phone and kids could check in without cell phones. It seems like every year kids are getting phones at a younger age. So much so that there are cell phones designed for kids that parents can control.

One of the most popular phone for kids is the Firefly.

These phones have many of the features of standard cell phones these days, but they have built-in parental controls. The parental controls include: the ability to limit incoming and outgoing calls, contacts stored in the phone book, new contacts being added, restricted texting. So there is a plus side, parents who feel they need to provide their kids with cell phones can have peace of mind knowing that they are in control. My question is, are we as a society getting kids hooked on cell phones too early? Anyone with a cell phone has probably forgot it at home and had that feeling of anxiety and detachment, is it healthy for kids to develop this attachment so early?

New York Times Article: Federal Employees Texting While Driving

Texting while driving has been the topic of many news stories and conversations lately. On October 2nd, 2009 this issue reached new heights. President Obama signed an executive order banning federal employees from texting while driving. The order bans texting while driving a car provided by the government or while driving any car using a government provided cell phone. The rule also applies when employees are using their own cars and phones but conducting government business. The ban will eventually seek to restrict bus drivers and truckers who cross state lines from using cell phones while driving. Transportation Secretary, Ray H. LaHood called this issue "a deadly epidemic of distracted driving." Hood believes that this ban on federal employees will show other publics the seriousness of distracted driving. University of Utah professor, David Strayer studies distracted driving has been quoted saying "[banning texting] makes people feel good and makes it look like you’re doing something, but you’re not tackling the more difficult problem...It misses the larger point.”

My question is, what is the larger point? People who text and drive know the risk they are taking. So why are there so many people that continue to do it? Why is is that we have to be communicating in one way or another all the time? How many car accidents, deaths, and close calls do people have to see to make it clear?