Media Chatter

Advertising is taking over media in our society, through forms such as newspapers, magazines, and film. In America, especially, you can’t switch on the radio, turn on the television, or walk to the bus stop without the influence of one advertiser or another staring at you through the eyes of an endorsement. But with our culture, and our world, flooding with commercial after commercial, are advertisements leaking influence out of our media and into our daily lives, altering our individual behavior?

One of the most influential and controversial types of advertising lies to the tobacco industry, which produces commercials aimed at encouraging their audience toward tobacco consumption. Cigarettes and tobacco products have produced flavored cigarettes, “healthier” cigars, and even race-based products such as the short-lived Uptown cigarette in an attempt to influence their audience. In 1988, for example, the tobacco company, Camel, reinvented their cartoon mascot, giving him sunglasses and trendier clothes. After this ad campaign alone, the percentage of teens under the age of eighteen that purchased and preferred Camel cigarettes increased from 1 percent to 33 percent.

The tactics of the tobacco business are to make a dangerous and potentially lethal substance appealing. Through successful advertising campaigns that have statistically increased the consumers’ appeal to tobacco products, more and more individuals have begun to purchase and smoke cigarettes, cigars, etc. But campaigns such as the Camel advertising of 1988, are advertising beyond the lines of appropriate by appealing to grand amounts of consumers under age. Is this publicizing beyond commercial speech rights?

Freedom of speech is commonly forgotten when critiquing advertisements. People complain of the inappropriateness of commercials, such as the stylization of cigarettes, but forget that advertising companies are allowed the equal liberties of the audiences they are reaching. Should tobacco be banished from the pages of periodicals or the sides of buses? No. However, the tobacco industry needs to filter their commercials, making them more audience appropriate. If one commercial changes the minds of 32 percent of under-aged teens, encouraging them to consume cigarettes, the strategy of advertising needs to mature to reach an older, and legal, age-range of individuals.

Advertising is the largest grossing media form, and a substantial amount of commercials today are aimed at getting consumers to purchase substances such as tobacco. But when these endorsements affect the lifestyles of citizens they shouldn’t, a change must be made. Freedoms have limits, limits advertisers need to abide by. Sell us cigarettes all you want, just remember to filter.

Children are susceptible to a lot of the pressures of this world; fitting in, identity, confidence.  It seems childhood has lost its innocence, and with some other the advertisement on television or radio during daytime hours it’s becoming an issue of where to draw the line?

I don’t think that commercials for some companies should been advertised during the time children are watching   television or listening to the radio. I understand that companies need to make money and I know advertising is a key player in that but some of the commercials I’ve seen lately are just tasteless or give more information then I would ever want to know. I’m and adult I believe I have a good understanding of things but a kid they’re still trying to figure the world out and make sense of things. By commercials coming out that advertise sex, indecent humor or alcohol, it’s no wonder kids aren’t going up like they used to.

Flipping through the radio I heard a commercial for sex store like: Adam and Eve, or pure romance. Advertising how “you’ll be sexy in ..” blah or “ how he won’t be able to “keep his hands off you”. Please, I think that shouldn’t ever be advertised even at night radio or television. I don’t want to know about anyone sexual frustration or their “fantasy”. I think it could consequently send the message to young girls listen thinking I have to be sexy to appeal to a boy, and he should want me. Young girls are susceptible to a lot of things in this worlds; the perfect body, identity, and being wanted (not men in particular, peers too). I mean I think men and women I mean it’s the way it should be but not girl and boys, and when you’re young and hearing that maybe but using some tickling powder or whatever they advertise someone will want you, it seems pretty appealing, and its buy-able. And it sends the idea that women are supposed to be submissive and if they go out and buy this product they will be “well-liked”. I think it’s sickening.

And it’s not just the girls either you have young boys too looking for approval from society and possibly the opposite sex.  I recall on FOX a few years back I saw a Trojan commercial advertising a bar of pigs, and women walking around them. So this one pig at the bar with this woman seems to be having no luck keeping her attention let alone conversation. So the little pig goes to the bathroom and there just happens to be a machine for none other than Trojan condoms. So the little pig gets the condom and suddenly he transforms into a “man”, and then of course the girl at the bar starts talking to him! It sends the idea that to get the girl you have to use Trojan condoms, or even have sex with her.  Like women are some trophy and if you don’t use their condom you’re a pig and women won’t notice you.  That whole idea sound like it came from a pig!  I think what upsets me more is that this commercial wasn’t on VH1 or MTV it was on FOX! That’s ridiculous! But I’m not surprised we see this all the time in alcohol commercials and if they drink this beer they get the girl or girls. I think these not only encourage sex at a young age but drinking underage too.

I think there needs to be better regulation for these kinds of commercials because you never know who exactly is watch or listen or if they’re taking it with a grain of salt. Advertisers seem to be aiming at younger age group by running sexual ads during the day and on a pretty basic network, but maybe they’ll have a lifelong buyer. But at what cost?

Over the past several decades advertising that is specifically aimed at children are usually food ads, toys, and sometimes beauty ads for young females. Obesity has become a growing problem in America, and today is still growing.

During the past 20 years there has been a dramatic increase in obesity in the United States. Obesity is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, certain types of cancer, and type 2 diabetes.

I believe that food ads that are advertising “junk food” should be regulated, especially for young viewers. As millions of children watch these shows, if ads for Gogrut came on as a substitute for “junk food” like Hersheys chocolate, obesity would subside.

Kids and tweens favorite, iCarly on Nickelodeon was number 6, the second most-watched scripted content on cable for the week, bringing in 4,656 viewers.

Children’s eating habits would improve leading to a healthy eating lifestyle for the future.

11 big food companies, including McDonald’s, Campbell Soup and PepsiCo, have agreed to stop advertising to children under 12 products that do not meet certain nutritional standards.

Many schools have adopted nutritional standards. I belive we need to regulate these “junk food” ads, and exchange them for a healthy snack that kids will enjoy and parents will love as well. We all need to set some type of a nutrition standard.

Chapter 11 – Question 4

I think that advertising targeted at children should be regulated. Children are in such a crucial formative age and must be brought up with strong morals and clean content that promotes a healthy and functional lifestyle.

One thing I’ve noticed about advertising targeted at kids is that the ads are actually indirectly hoping to influence that parents. Kids may see an ad promoting the latest Nerf gun or Bratz doll. Kids will then run to their parents begging for the trinket, and if they whine and scream enough, often times the parent will drive to Toys-R-Us and purchase the toy just to get some peace and quiet.

I feel advertisers use this same tactic when advertising food products to children. It would be hard for me to recall ever seeing a commercial telling us kids to adore carrots and peas. But McDonald’s made Happy Meals something to be so excited about – and the prize! Oh, that prize was so enthralling; especially if the happy meal so kindly suggested that you “collect all 12!”  Now it’s true that McDonald’s has given you the option of having apple slices rather than those greasy yet delicious French fries. Yes, you can get milk instead of my childhood favorite, orange soda. So I must hand it to McDonald’s for making some improvements, even if those chicken nuggets are still strangely gray and spongy. But the concept that fast food is exciting is engrained into children’s minds. These same children (I know, because used to be this kid) grow up to be people who in a rush have no qualms pulling into a drive-thru to ease their hunger and stress. Why not promote healthy eating at home? Why not make family dinners seem thrilling? Oh wait, that doesn’t make as much money, I remember. Children are just a market to be used to create cash flow. But if these ads were to be regulated, could the obesity of our country begin to decline? Could families be more cohesive due to spending time actually talking over a home-cooked meal? All this could begin by teaching the children what is good from the get-go.

So while advertisers understandable are looking out for their own by simply using another demographic to plump up their pockets, I feel that some regulation of what kids see in ads could potentially make a big difference in the culture that generation then rises to create.

What oncesee will always influence what one will do. 

An expectation occurs that because of an image a view will respond to it.  An example would be a stop sign.  Americans especially know that when they see a red octogon they should halt accordingly.  Advertisers know this too.

For example the popular body spray AXE , targets men by associating their product with scantily clad women chasing the men that wear their product.  Even when I searched the product questionable pictures arose (I don’t encourage viewing but if you really want to). 

For the adult these ads are not nessicairly appropriate, but at least by then, the maturity levels have developed where one has their own morals set in mind and can filter accordingly.  However, with younger children, morals have not yet developed according to Piaget.  Piaget says this

In moral-ethical realm, the child is not able to show principles underlying best behavior.

He also says that the child is

Easy to believe in magical increase, decrease, disappearance.  Reality not firm.  Perceptions dominate judgment.

Based on these two facts advertisers should be weary when advertising to children.  One must keep in mind that because a moral definition must occur before we try to persuade, not brainwash. 

The problem of what morals do we portray to children occurs.  Thusly advertising to children should stay what it is, childlike.  With childhood innocence is associated and encouraged.  Remember your childhood, carefree and probably innocent.  Children should remain as innocent.

Think about a time when you looked at a poster advertisement with a flawless looking celebrity on the front, advertising a beauty product or clothing line. Did it make you want to buy the product or even just make you a little curious about it? Advertisements are obviously designed to draw you in, giving you the idea that the specific product can make you look just like the gorgeous model or celebrity in the picture. Advertising is often heavily criticized because it can be so misleading. Some advertising tactics can be down right unethical. An advertisement is designed to make a product or company look as appealing as possible to draw in more consumers. Some of the methods of achieving this seem so wrong and cause a lot of controversy. An example of this seemingly evil advertising is the editing of photos. While it’s expected of a company to want its product presented as attractively as possible, photo editing is taken way too far. Models are airbrushed and trimmed until they look impossibly perfect, and even sometimes a little too “perfect”. While a certain amount of photo-shopping is considered acceptable when it comes to advertising, the over-the-top editing also causes frequent scandals. Recently, a Ralph Lauren model was fired by the company for being overweight. However, her photo appeared in an ad later and she appeared so “trim” that the proportioning of her body seemed physical impossible. Not only did the photo just look ridiculous, but it also raised many questions. Another photo-shop job that sparked controversy was Kelly Clarkson’s photo on the cover of “Self” magazine. She appeared much slimmer on the cover of the magazine than she did in candid shots. For a magazine whose message is all about confidence in body image, this seems very wrong. Think about a time when you were visiting a resort website, looking for a vacation place, and ended up picking one that looked really appealing. The photos on the website made it look like a perfect magical get away, but when you arrived at the resort it looked nothing like the pictures. This kind of thing happens to us everyday, in small and large ways. We are drawn in by the an appealing ad and made to believe that this product will in some way make our lives better, but we quickly discover that said product is really no different than the next.

Advertising has been an important part of our media world for many years and will continue that in the many years to come.  Most every interstate you drive down, television show you watch, magazine you read, and many other forms of media include a surplus of advertising.  Advertising is corporations and businesses’ way of letting consumers know about their product and marketing it to the consumer by making it appeal to them.  Companies will try and make their ad’s appealing by giving consumers a picture of their product with maybe some of the features that accompany that product.  Almost all companies have a slogan or saying that is most associated with their product which helps consumers recognize a particular product when they hear the slogan. 

My earliest recollections of advertising or watching a commercial was when I was a young child and I would be watching cartoons on Saturday mornings and I would see a commercial for a new toy or board game.  I would love watching these ads as the companies and toy manufactures would show kids playing with the new toy and them having the most fun enjoying the product that it would make me want that product for Christmas or my birthday.  I would often see the product and immediately want to have it in my hands rite now. 

My favorite ads are the Gatorade ads.  I like these ads because I love sports and most all of these commercials.  I also like these commercials because of the fierce competition it shows many popular athletes engaging in.  I also really like Gatorade as a drink which beckons me to like the commercials.  If all the popular athletes that are featured on the commercials drink Gatorade then why wouldn’t anyone want not want to drink Gatorade.  I also really like the Gatorade slogan, “Is it in you?”  This quote is really recognized in the world of sports as being arguably the most popular sports drink in the market.

I really like funny commercials that can make me laugh.  These commercials give me a little chuckle while watching a sports event, or one of my favorite shows.  Normally these commercials consist of  a funny prank or joke that I will remember for a while due to a funny part of it or perhaps the level of laughter it gets out of me.

Advertising will always be a part of our society no matter what media becomes in today’s world.  Companies will always need advertising to help for the success of their business and their products.  Advertising will continue to have an impact in the business world for many years to come.

Yes, advertising should be regulated when it comes to focusing on children. Young children have such innocent and trustworthy minds. Their minds and imagination can be easily corrupted by filth from careless advertising companies. Our book says that since children and teenagers live in a society that is dominated by TV advertising, they are often looked at as “consumer trainees” and that the youth of America has about 500 billion dollars a year influence on spending money. The youth and their families have a great input on buying everything, such as cars, candy, electronics, and many more items. With such a vast market to attract, the advertising machine, which is directed towards children, is going to be hard to slow down, but it needs to be ceased, or at least decreased. Today, children are watching more and more television than ever before.  The average child sees nearly 20,000 thirty second commercials a year.

Furthermore, with such a huge market, it is still a daily challenge for marketers to keep up with what is “cool” to children and the youth. Cartoons, clothes, and styles frequently change almost every week and it is a grind to keep up with and stay on top of the fluctuation of coolness. Marketers have changed and adapted with increasingly seductive marketing and great product placement in youth programming.  You’re always going to have kids that want the new action figure that came out because of the new cartoon.  I feel that showing those advertisements is fine, but when they start showing car commercials after Sponge Bob or My little Pony and Friends, that’s too far.  There is no need for kids to even see that kind of advertisement.  I believe the commercials that are shown on kid channels should be made educational and have some sort of value to share with kids instead of trash that says call in the next five minutes and you will get a knife that will cut through a brick.  Leave those ads to the adult channels and if they are stupid enough to purchase an item than it’s their problem

Advertising is everywhere. Its on the highway as your driving to Greenville, its in the previews before you see a movie, and on the clothes you wear. There are many different kinds of ads. A lot of advertisement today would be classified as controversial. Some of the most controversial advertisement is for alcohol. There are some that think that alcohol advertisement should be prohibited and some that think alcohol advertisement is the same as any other advertisement. Multiple facts show that alcohol ads do have a larger impact on young teens than any other age group.

Studies show that when young teens are exposed to more alcohol ads they are more encouraged to participate in underage drinking .

Another study found that, among a group of 2,250 middle-school students in Los Angeles, those who viewed more television programs containing alcohol commercials while in the seventh grade were more likely in the eighth grade to drink beer, wine/liquor, or to drink three or more drinks on at least one occasion during the month prior to the follow-up survey.

This shows how sensitive teens are to these kinds of ads. The most common alcohol advertisements are for Budweiser, Smirnoff, Coors, and Captain Morgan. These ads are seen daily on television, in magazines, and on billboards. Because of these advertisements, and the effect they have on the younger population, some want them to be prohibited.

The first amendment gives us the right to freedom of speech. So with the first amendment any advertisement can be distributed as long as it is within certain parameters. Many people want some ads to be prohibited but according to the law there is nothing wrong with it. This is where some have the hardest time between what is right and what is wrong. So, is it wrong to put up ads that help destroy our youth? Or is it right to have ads that might promote certain behaviors, but its ok because according to the law we are doing nothing wrong? You will have to be the judge.

Children today are exposed to more at the age of five then I was at 13. The violence, drug, and general information advertisements they have access to are unreal. Advertisement agencies might assume that children only view the commercials shown on the youth channels but their assumption is far from correct. Children have nearly unlimited access to all channels especially when they are viewing the channels with parents or in public places. Regulation for children aimed advertising should definitely be regulated. It seems like today every time you turn on television you see more advertisements for alcohol and tobacco products. This is not having positive effects on our youth today. What our children are shown affects the way our world will be as they grow into adulthood. When I am an elder in this country I don’t want the president, doctors, lawyer, leaders, etc. to have been influenced by the advertisements they were exposed to as children.
Children today look up to professional athletes and want to be just like them. These athletes are used in advertisements for all kinds of products from video games to clothing. For example, all-star Minnesota Viking quarterback Brett Favre is used in Wrangler Jeans commercials. This gives the impression to children that if they own a pair of these jeans they will be able to throw the ball like Brett Favre. Although this is not necessarily a bad influence, it shows how children think, so when exposed to negative things, their minds work the same way. If an athlete happens to appear in an alcohol commercial, children want to be like that all-star and consume the products as well. This begins to affects underage drinking and spirals downhill from there. Violence in movies works the same way. When children see previews or “advertisements” for the movie, they see their idols participating in violent activities. I mean what child wouldn’t want to be invincible like James Bond? From driving fast cars to living life on the edge children are going to follow the examples set by their idols.
If we monitor what advertisements our children view on television we can hopefully change children’s views of what they see as right and wrong. If we continue to expose them to dangerous advertisements we are only allowing them to develop the wrong ideas of how the world should be. By controlling what children see we can ultimately improve their future as well as our own.

I am not a parent, but the question of how to explain objectional advertisements to children is something that every young adult needs to think about. I know that when I was a little child and a racy advertisement came on the television they would either turn the channel or tell me to close my eyes. As I got older and into middle school or high school they did not seem to care as much about the racy ads or any type of objectional ads. However, sometimes they would try and explain that the worlds view of certain products was different than our views and they way they portrayed them was not in good taste.
I think that when I become a parent the strategies that I will use will probably come from the way I was brought up. I probably would not be to worried about the advertisements my kids see on television until they are in the first or second grade. When they are at that age and a racy advertisement or a beer commercial comes on the television i will most likely turn the channel. At that age I feel like they would not be able to realize that I would change the channel because of the type of advertisement comes on.
Now as they start to get older and into middle school I will probably not worry about changing the channel much (however, i hate watching commercials), but I will explain to them that it is not right to view women in scantly clad clothes or listen to advertisements with vulgar language in them. Explaining to them why these advertisements are not in good taste will hopefully allow them to learn at a young age that there are inappropriate ways to do things and that there can be several ways to change an ad around to make it tasteful.
One example would be if me and my son were up late one night watching a re-run of a television show and one of the Call Girl commercials came on and if he was old enough to know what was going on but not understand why that whole concept was wrong. I would probably let the commercial go on for a few seconds and then turn the channel and tell him that just because those girls say its a great time and that it does not cost much, does not mean that it is an okay thing to do. I would tell him that any type of sexual intimacy with a girl you are not married too is wrong even if you are not in the same place as her. I would also explain that in advertisements, companies want to make everyone think stuff is okay by making the girls smile or having good look people in ads, but that all that is just a ploy to get you to buy something. I would explain to him to not just watch an ad for a product and then go buy it, but to do his research first and then make a smart decision.

Advertising at its inception was a simple concept.  It began with business owners hanging wooden signs depicting the names of their stores and town criers announcing the arrival of merchant ships.  Advertising has since evolved into a fundamental attribute of society, unpredictable and all-powerful.

While the development of advertising has allowed it to make cultural contributions, such as “raising the American standard of living and financing most media industries,” its continual growth also makes room for more criticism (Campbell 368).

One of the more serious concerns that have critics and consumers worried is advertising’s approach to health and beauty. The ability of advertisers to create false values in consumers, compelling people to buy things they really don’t need, is undeniable. But sometimes these products may turn out to be harmful (such as tobacco and alcohol).

Promotion of tobacco consumption is one of the most vocalized criticisms of advertising.  While some restrictions have been placed on their advertising, tobacco companies are still spending $12.49 billion a year in advertising trying to convince non-smokers to take on the habit and encouraging smokers to keep buying.  This latest number from 2006 is down from the 2005 sales, when tobacco companies spent $13.1 billion.  However, even though ad sales may be down, the number is still nearly twenty times more than what is spent on anti-tobacco promotion (Campbell).

Numbers like these would have any (non-smoking) critic concerned, especially those who rightfully claim that tobacco companies’ advertising is misleading and “manipulative”.

Another serious criticism is often heard concerning advertising’s definition of beauty which, over time, is becoming narrower and narrower.

It is rare to see anything advertised by a woman who is not thin and beautiful, whether it is for clothing, food, cosmetics, or cleaning supplies.  The women displayed by the media, specifically in the advertising realm, are more often than not portrayed as nothing short of perfect.  It’s no wonder that that this is the body type girls and women are striving for, because this is the only body type we ever see.

Advertisers’ usage of exceptionally thin models has transformed our culture’s idea of beauty and has created an overwhelming amount of pressure on all women to look the same. However, a woman’s road to thin and “beautiful” is often a rough one, with many ending in cosmetic surgeries and battles with eating disorders, all in an attempt to meet their goal.

In addition to its promotion of cigarettes and “beauty,” advertising has also been criticized for stereotyping men and women, insulting the consumer intelligence, and influencing high costs in the economy.

The negative aspects of advertising bring the integrity of this industry into question. As a result, it is imperative that everyone use discernment as we allow something so prevalent and powerful to influence (or not influence) our daily lives.

People have long been critical and speculative of advertising. After World War II, criticism was so strong that the industry launched a public-service-type campaigns promoting everything from blood drives to highway safety, a practice that the advertising industry continues today.

For as long as it has been a profitable industry, the public has had a number of complaints about advertising. Early criticism towards advertising accused it of instilling discontentment in the hearts of buyers, creating knowledge of needs that consumers didn’t have until they were exposed to ads. As time has progressed, complaints have grown and branched out so much that the FCC has even created a web page to inform any would-be complainers of what merits a legitimate complaint and how to appropriately file one.

Probably the most widely recognized issue with advertising is the message that many companies send about women. We’re all familiar with the ad, the one that flaunts the skinny blond in a bikini advertising the newest line of makeup that seemingly promises not only to cover up every unwanted pimple on a 15-years-old’s face, but also send her on her way to having a perfect body just like the model-actress on the screen.

An advertisement sells a promise before it sells a product.

Middle-aged men buy the latest luxury car because it promises to win them an attractive younger girlfriend. Teenage boys buy certain types of cologne because it promises to make girls throw themselves at at them. Women buy the most innovative vacuum because they believe it will make their husbands appreciate them more.

When an advertisement makes a promise that is too risque or fails to keep its promise, people begin to complain. Word gets out that the cigarettes people thought would make them look cool cause cancer, or a teenage girl develops an eating disorder because the diet their magazine promised would make them look like the cover girl was not enough, and people become very discontent. Advertisements are designed to cut straight to the core of what people desire and exploit it to sell their product.

People will always complain about advertisements, whether it’s because a television commercial ignores a young and more innocent audience in order to push the envelope of sexuality to appeal to men, or because the latest toy fails to meet the expectations a 10-year-old. Advertising is an industry destined to piss people off.

By the twentieth century, America’s society had experienced a shift from being producer-directed to consumer-driven. Furthermore, it experienced a growing focus on technological advancement because of the pictures and stories seen by the average American concerning the “latest and greatest”. Advertising was and is an incredibly influencing social factor. With such power, a question is raised to discuss an issue like regulation: Does it really matter if ads are aimed at children? Consider this, a Stanford University study concluded that children as young as two can be influenced by a thirty-second ad for a certain brand. American families spend $500 billion dollars a year on objects influenced by young children and teens. Simple facts like this make it obvious that advertising to children should be regulated. Families simply cannot afford to ignore the moral and fiscal issues brought up by advertising.
Many people in America are right now fed up with the issue of beauty in advertising. Simply look at advertising campaigns like the Dove Beauty Campaign to see that most people have had enough with stereotypical beauty. This raises an important moral point to advertising. Ads should be regulated so that girls the age of two, who seem to all ready know what kind of brands they like, can see the truth of beauty. People cannot stand by and allow their young children to be fed images and such that promote impossibilities. It’s untruthful. That would seem to be enough for most philosophers to have claimed it indecent.
Secondly, and since young boys have been hitherto left out of this discussion, another aspect of this prior argument should be addressed. What young boy has not become entangled with the idea of G.I. Joe? When this was a cartoon it was mainly a commercial. Sure, it had a story line and a plot, but the entire point was to promote a toy line. Groups like Action for Children’s Television (ACT) have been trying to curb shows like this for years. All of this is simply commercialism: cartoons as capitalism. America seems to care more for money than quality storytelling and that has something to say about mediocrity. Furthermore, this type of activity leads to parents spending plenty of money on things that kids can play with for thirty minutes when they happen to catch their favorite show.
Finally, the conclusion to all of this is that ads must be regulated. The idea does not state that children should be left out of marketing, because children are the next generation to buy products, but it does mean that ads need to be careful with how they aim themselves at children. Children need to learn to make their own decisions and should be thus given the truth behind a certain type of makeup/clothing, and should have the ability to understand how their favorite toys do not have to destroy their parents wallets.

Chapter 11 Question 7

Advertising has existed since ancient times, ever since shops and merchants have existed. Throughout the history of advertising, many ads have been questionable or straight up controversial. However, most ads have been protected through the first amendment, stating:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

I believe advertising is part of what makes our democracy so different from other democracies all across the world. Not that I personally support the advertising of cigarettes, I do support the right of free speech. China, for example, is no longer allowed to even advertise tobacco products (according to Media and Culture page 371). I believe the rights of free speech comes with responsibilities. As tobacco and alcohol goes, I believe that if you’re going to advertise it, you should advertise every side of it. Advertise it responsibly.

Part of what allows us to have so much freedom as advertising goes are the commissions and agencies that help prevent misleading product claims. Not saying that many print and media ads don’t fly right below the radar, but it does help us from banning certain products entirely. One example of a correction that has been running on several stations is a birth control ad correcting all of the false statements claimed in a previous advertisement.  Commercials like this are fairly common but also allow us to keep running those types of ads instead of banning them entirely.

As I stated before, I believe with advertising comes responsibilities.  It is certainly impossible to trust every business or agent that goes into the advertising field, but its not fair to say that all advertising is against the ideals of democracy. Advertising is part of our democracy. Part of our freedom. David Ogilvy worded it well when he said;

“Advertisement is only evil when it advertises evil things.”

Lately I have seen far more advertisements against drunk driving than the alcohol itself, more ads for tobacco patches and gum help addictions than ads for the actual tobacco. I believe that for the most part our agencies and counsels have been doing a decent job of setting things right.

Chapter 11, Question #5

Advertising has been well-known for its controversial techniques for as long as advertising has existed. To catch the consumers’ eye, many companies will employ edgy and racy advertising. Tobacco and alcohol companies are notorious for using controversial ads to attain the attention of their customers, with such ads as the cartoon character “Joe Camel” for Camel cigarettes and an athletic college student having a lot of friends and sexual success due to drinking alcohol. These industries have pursued edgy ads to reach their audience. These advertising trends have faced a lot of criticism for their behavior and censorship has ensued.

The First Amendment of the Constitution states:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Under this law, censorship of any company pertaining to advertising is unconstitutional. The company has a freedom of speech and a freedom of press; therefore, it is allowed to advertise its product, no matter what that product may be. The company can be restricted on how and to whom it advertises though.

The company is not allowed to advertise its product to an audience that is incapable of consuming the product legally. For instance, smoking is illegal for anyone under the age of eighteen; therefore, cigarette companies are not allowed to advertise to a young audience, only adults. Since Camel at one time used the “Joe Camel” cartoon to sell its cigarettes, this was deemed unlawful because Camel was aiming its advertising at a young audience. Camel was fined heavily and now no cigarette company is allowed to use cartoons in its ads.

Alcohol often uses the same tactics as tobacco companies to sell their products. They show off their product as sexy, fun, acceptable, and the generally cool thing to do. They, too, have been criticized for how they reach out to a younger audience. Budweiser was put under scrutiny when it used the Budweiser frogs during the 1990’s. The three frogs would croak out, “Bud-weis-errr.” This was deemed to be cartoon in nature and aimed at a young audience, clearly an audience under the age of twenty one (which is the legal age for drinking alcohol).

Tobacco and alcohol companies also focus on the fact that their product is enjoyable and fun, not on the actual content of the cigarette or drink. This approach is different to most industries as to how they advertise. Beer companies rarely discuss what is in the drink, but they will however discuss why their beer is better than another company’s drink. This raises concerns as to whether or not consumers are aware of the contents of the product they are buying.

Every company, no matter how big or small, is constitutionally allowed to advertise its product; the verdict is that simple. But the ad must adhere to all federal and state laws abiding to the audience of possible consumers, which is the case with tobacco and alcohol. Censorship is legal, an all-out ban is not.

Advertising is what is used to appeal to the senses and desires of the consumer body. Certain advertisements focused on the clothing industry, tobacco industry, and all sorts of other departments of media, are ever present on television and the radio. Corporations and companies try to aim advertising at specific age groups to grab their interest and business. I do believe that advertising aimed at children should be regulated.
On television today, there are commercials for sugar cereals, candy, junk food, and toys for children to watch and beg their parents for. Children claim that these items on the commercials are things “they’ve got to have”.

A recent poll on children and advertising shared these two facts:

The average child may view as many as 40,000 television commercials every year. (Strasburger, 2001)

Young children are not able to distinguish between commercials and TV programs. They do not recognize that commercials are trying to sell something. (Comstock, 1991)

It is cruel for advertisers to prey on children just so they can get their parents’ money and business. Advertisers are also encouraging an unhealthy diet and lifestyle. There is not anything wrong with toys, except for those that encourage a morally-wrong lifestyle, but to encourage incredible amounts of sugar and fat in their diets is unthoughtful and selfish. Advertisers need to appeal to the parents and just cut right to the chase, rather than going around things and reaching the children to get to the parents.

Advertising is what makes the consumer world go around. With advertising, we are informed of products that we either need or want in our daily lives. Cleaning supplies, cars, clothes, you name it, it will probably have a commercial or billboard. You cannot drive down any road for more than 5 minutes without seeing some kind of ad. The ad does not necessarily be for some big company either. Even the sign advertising a garage sale down the road is advertising.

Advertising is now a major force in American and world economics, however what kind of affect can this mass advertising have on younger children? Pam Willenz says

Research shows that children under the age of eight are unable to critically comprehend televised advertising messages and are prone to accept advertiser messages as truthful, accurate, and unbiased.

So should advertising that is targeted at small children be limited? I believe it should be, just because they do not have the ability to make a critical decision of what is being shown to them. What if every time you saw a Mr. Clean ad, you were automatically drawn to buy it, regardless of what you think about the product? That is roughly that same as advertising aimed at small children. They automatically except the product even if it is absolute garbage.

When the target group of your advertising is unable to critically evaluate the ad your showing, it ceases to be called advertising. It becomes more than just persuasion or coercion, instead it comes close to actual mind control.

What can be done about this? Should ad companies be regulated or punished for running ads targeted at younger children? Punishment might be too extreme this early, but the government should begin to become involved and pass legislation that limits advertising to children under the age of eight.

Such advertising includes food, toys, movies, and other products that children would be interested in. However, they should not be advertised on channels or in areas where it is easily seen by young children. Instead it should be marketed to their parents, who do have the ability to critically evaluate ads and decide what is best for their own children. As the child gets older, he or she will gain the ability to evaluate what kinds of things they want and need, but until they do, their parents should be the ones to choose what products to give or to protect their child from.

One of the biggest complaints about alcohol advertising is that it makes it appear that people who drink have a full time party lifestyle, and that this image cause children and teenagers to want to drink before they are legally allowed to do so.

While this argument can not be denied—just look at beer commercials on television for examples of partying being portrayed as the glamorous lifestyle—this is also a fundamental principle of any product advertising campaign.

Car advertisers often show their vehicles performing amazing feats of speed or off-road ability. When ESPN advertises an upcoming game, they show Lebron James throwing down a thunderous dunk, not sitting on his couch reading a book.

The goal of advertisers is to make consumers excited about their product.

Who would want to drink Budweiser if the commercials portrayed a friendless man sitting at home by himself, drinking a Bud Light while checking his empty Match.com email box?

Yet so many want to limit alcohol advertising because the exciting content may make teenagers think they should go out and get drunk on the weekend.

The biggest problem with trying to limit advertisements for alcohol is deciding who determines the standards of advertising decency. There are not only people who support a wide range of opinions on the issue of alcohol, but there are many on both sides that take the extreme view.

Many people believe there should be a total ban on alcohol, a return to the days of prohibition. In addition to their goals of banning gambling and homosexuality, the Prohibition Party hopes to ban any sale or advertisement of alcohol. They believe that drinking alcohol is a sin and that, despite the numerous instances of wine drinking, the win referred to in the Bible was simply grape juice.

On the other side of the fence there are countless websites and petitions dedicated to making alcohol legally accessible to people under the age of 21. These people argue that the drinking age should be lowered to 18 because a person of that age is old enough to vote and serve in the military, and should therefore be allowed to legally buy alcohol.

When looking at reforming alcohol advertising, to whom do you grant the ability to determine the standards of decency?

One side or the other gets to determine the future of the industry and the opponent will continue to shout their argument from the rooftops. Or advertisers could try to find a middle ground that makes everyone happy, thereby making no one happy.

I personally believe that alcohol advertising should be left the way it is, but companies should be required to do more to educate young people on the dangers of alcohol. With proper education about the health risks related to alcohol and the dangers of drinking and driving, perhaps the next generation will be able to enjoy a beer or a great glass of cabernet sauvignon while also being responsible.

Question 6 – Chapter 10

Would I read a book on the Kindle or iPod? Yes, and I have. However, there are reasons that I both dislike and yet enjoy the ability to read a book on an electronic device.

I have read three books on my iPod Touch. Assassin’s Apprentice by Robin Hobb was a book that I found by accident while scrolling through what Amazon’s free Kindle book section. I downloaded it to my iPod Touch and liked it so much that I downloaded the other two books in the trilogy.

I truly enjoyed the portability and ease of having all of these books in one tiny device. My iPod fits in my pocket or purse and I usually have it with me wherever I go. So if there is ever a need to pass some time, I can simply whip out my iPod and I have my trusty books with me.  The Kindle application instantly delivers the book I choose to download, keeps my place within the book via “bookmarking”, and then recommends books I may enjoy in the future, based on previous purchases. Much like iTunes revolutionized the way I listened to and discovered new music, the Kindle seems to be changing the way I accumulate various pieces of literature.

However, I am old fashioned. I enjoy the smell of a library and the feel of a heavy book. I have every intention of one day buying the actual book copy of the trilogy I read on the Kindle. I hope to have bookshelves filled with books in a house one day. I feel that books are important keepsakes. How can I pass on a digital file to my grandchildren? It just does not seem to be a venerable as an actual book. So while the only drawback of the actual reading experience on my iPod was the eye strain that comes from staring at an LCD screen for so long, I know that owning the actual book in physical form is important to me.

Reading is an activity that I know I will continue to do for pleasure. It is good to know that I have options of how to transport my favorite books around. It is also nice to know that large books can now fit in my pocket. Yet I feel that reading a book via electronic devices lacks the thrill of cracking the spine on a fresh paperback novel or handling a book that has been passed down for generations. Books are magical, and I feel that I will always want to be able to actually touch them, not only see them on my iPod Touch.

Chapter 10; Question 3

If I were opening an independent bookstore in a town that already had a chain bookstore, I would definitely have tough competition.  How does one compete with discounts, comfortable chairs, and Starbucks coffee?  I think one way I could draw people in would be with service.  Many times, independent bookstore owners have a much greater knowledge of literature than the sales clerk over at Borders or Barnes & Noble.  Independent store owners also know their regular customers (and vice versa) and know what kind of books they like.  You won’t find this kind of personal interaction at a large chain. 

In the movie You’ve Got Mail, a subplot focuses on the trials a small bookstore faces when a large chain moves in down the street.  When asked how he will draw customers away from the small bookstore on the corner and into his large chain, Tom Hanks’ character responds:

“Do you know what, we are gonna seduce them. We’re gonna seduce them with our square footage and our discounts and our deep armchairs and our cappuccino. They’re gonna hate us at the beginning, but we’ll get ‘em in the end…we’re going to sell them cheap books and legal addictive stimulants.”

At the end of the movie, the smaller bookstore, not being able to compete, is forced to close its doors for good.  Even though the number of independent bookstores nationwide has dropped significantly, that decline is slowing.  According to The Boston Globe, approximately 350 new independent shops have opened since 2005.  One reason their decline is slowing is because of the current recession; large chain retailers are struggling to bring in enough money to make a profit.    

Independent bookstores have a certain charm about them.  Most of the time, walls are covered up to the ceiling in book titles.  They are a part of the local community and local economy; many loyal customers keep going back for personalized service even after the chains have moved into town.  In the same article by The Boston Globe, one manager of an independent said:

“I do think there’s a swing back to valuing local and independent.  Small and local can be good places to do business and very healthy for your community.”

Because of the relationships local bookstores have formed with their communities , and with the current recession, I don’t think independent bookstores are out of luck just yet.

Books are enjoyed by all kinds of people. There are so many different genres of books that are appealing as well. Fiction, Science Fiction, Western, Fantasy, and Romance are just a few of the genres. These genres also apply to movies and TV shows. So why have books lasted so long considering the invention of television? Books have thrived because it unlocks imagination, they have in depth and detailed stories, and can be read at any pace. These are a few things that television can not provide.

Books have a special way of making those who read use massive amounts of imagination. Fantasy and Science Fiction books are usually the most imaginative books that one could read. Books such as Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and Eragon are some of the top 100 best Fantasy books. The setting of each of these book can be made up on their

Television does not offer a lot of detailed, in depth shows. Most of the shows on today are uncreative and not varied. There are many shows that are based on the medical field or criminal justice. Whenever a new book title comes out it is always different. TV shows become repetitive and boring. There are some people that believe that the TV shows America likes are the worst ones.

Some of the most boring shows on television have also become some of America’s most popular TV shows.

Another advantage to books is that they can be read anywhere at any time. There are many people that read at different paces as well. So being able to read whenever you want and not being rushed to read at a certain speed is why books are still around today. TV shows are played at certain time during the day which can be hard for some to watch at that time. This is why books have the upper hand.

Books have been around for just about as long as humans have and will be around until the end. Books have some threat such as Amazon Kindle or electronic books that might put up a fight against regular books. However books will always hold an importance in recording societies changes overall. Without books we would not be where we are today.

With the invention of the printing press by Gutenberg, books have flourished and helped literacy rates increase as well as giving education a big boost.  Books will remain in the mainstream with television because they are more transportable, smaller, directors base some top selling movies off of books, the maintenance is much more easy, and they allow you to use your own imagination as to the colors, settings, surroundings and so on.
Books are more easily hidden and transported than a television set, plain and simple.  Dragging a television set around would require a lot of energy and would be down right stupid, given that most popular bars, restaurants, and clubs already have TV sets.   Books require nothing more than the ability to sound out the words and to be able to flip the pages where as a television set needs power and now a direct connection from some sort of cable line.   Books can be set in a pocket or pocketbook and held in one hand and you usually don’t hear of too many people being robbed and the only thing missing from their home was their collection of Harry Potter books, which have been turned into a very successful movie series.  I personally don’t read much in my spare time but from what I have heard of Mr. Potters adventures in the books, the movies can’t come close to matching them on the screen.  Many people have said about any book that has been turned into a movie that you need to read the book before you see the movie and that the book is much better.  Taking care of the books and televisions are much more different.  The televisions that Sony and Hitachi are putting out now look great and work amazing but when it comes time to transport them, be prepared to have a headache.  The TV’s can not lay down flat or they will break and they are so fragile that they can break from a three inch fall.  With books, they only thing they can’t survive is fire, and heavy water.  My textbooks get used as coasters, seat cushions, fly swatters, and even table levelers and the work as good as they did the day I bought them.  Books increase in price the older they are, as well as some television sets that are the first of it’s kind but nowhere near the amount that a 150 year old Bible sells for.  Electronics are also hampered by just about everything from dust and water to vibrations and weather.  Recently, books have gained yet another one-up on television because you can no longer receive signals through a regular set of rabbit ears as many have done in the past which takes out the small portable televisions someone might have taken to a play or on a camping trip.

I was six years old the first time I jumped into LeVar Burton’s world of Reading Rainbows. Transfixed by the cartoon colors of the theme song and the illustrated world of each book LeVar introduced, I sat in front of the television set every afternoon, striving to “be anything,” something the show told me was only achieved by delving into the land of literature. As I grew older and Rainbows evaporated into SpongeBob and The Office, my television watching veered off into a pathway that lured me away from books by satisfying my craving for instant entertainment. Programs such as these curved my thought process to a lazier state by providing me with pointless plots and time-filling entertainment that served no productive purpose. But despite television and cable’s placatingly prompt presentation, books have remained the top media constant, thriving in the realm of entertainment as they transcend placation and invoke imagination that pours outside of the television set.

Television has an alarming amount of boundaries that restricts the endurance of entertainment, including the provided imagination that prevents the innovation of the viewer. Many shows have developed characters, plots, and conflicts, as books do, but as we visually connect to the casted characters of the shows on television, we are trapped in a typecast world that is incredibly difficult to shatter. With literature, our sense of sight is left to our interpretation as we work to concoct the characters with the words of the author alone.

The book industry has also prevailed as the pinnacle of recording the events and experiences of societies worldwide, as it has passed treasured and imperative information down through the generations; whereas, the life of the television and cable industry hasn’t lived long enough to have carried considerable cultural facts. Branching from papyrus and scrolls, books have been woven into our world for ages, providing us with chronicles that continue to cultivate communities beyond the bounds of television’s capabilities.

Television hasn’t hindered publications, as cultural forecasters believed in the 1950s and 1960s.  Yet, television has enhanced the book industry by providing another medium for publication promotion. Programs such as Gossip Girl intrigue television viewers and guide them to the books they are based on, increasing the popularity of the original publication, and shows, such as Reading Rainbows and Oprah, promote certain books on lists and in book clubs, providing additional advertising for authors. When television shows grow in popularity, they either provide publication for books they are based on or for books that spin off of the shows growing popularity.

Merely a two dimensional step produced to help viewers climb the tread to the three dimensional realm of books, television is screen deep…our innovation to expanding imagination? It’s in a book.

Books, one of the oldest forms of communication, are still thriving in today’s culture despite the rise of digital technology. From infancy to adulthood people have come to find comfort in picture books, novels, and even text books. Comfort is not the only thing that a book has to offer that technology cannot. With the vast and vivid story lines offered by cable and television, many people have come to put down their books in exchange. However, not all story lines are conjured up by the directors of a television show or a movie.

Some of the top box office movies were based on a book. The Lord of the Rings trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkien was a series of books turned into movies that had outstanding results from the public. Also books such as The Golden Compass, and Harry Potter has been successful on screen. Because the explosion of these movies, people’s interest in the book becomes evident. This happened with J.K. Rowling’s book, the author of Harry Potter, she sold many books as each movie came out. As she continued to write the trilogy the demand for her books became greater. Once finishing the book, people would watch the movie and would be disappointed with the inaccuracy of how the director portrayed the novel. Harry Potter was not the only movie where audiences were upset with the directors portrayal of the book, Twilight was another book that fell short of the authors original story.

One reason why books are still increasing in number is because cable and movies have time constraints. A possible reason for the inaccurate portrayal of some movies based off of books is because books can go into greater detail about a character and the history of a situation much more than a movie can, and also it is cheaper. Yet the movie Watchmen was an accurate portrayal of the story written by the author. The only difference this story held from other stories put on screen by authors was that Watchmen was a comic book; comic books are much shorter than novels which allows for accurate displaying.

Books unlike cable and television are available more frequently to indulge in. The portability of a book allows for the reader to gain a more personal connection with the characters her or she is reading about. Because of its portability readers can take books places that television and cable cannot go. For example, on a plane a book reader has more freedom to decide on what genre of story to follow, instead of watching the limited channels the plane has to offer. Reasons such as theses are what causes for increase in printed books. Novels, having few or commonly no pictures, allow for readers to use their imagination to create the setting and characters within a book. This summons for the reader to become more involved with the book, almost giving the reader a personal role in the story. This quality is something cable and television will never posses.

Chapter 10, Question 4

As I said in my chapter one blog post, I am the lucky husband of a middle school media specialist and have gained insight into the book selection process for school libraries.

When schools order books, the librarian typically has to rely on synopses online to know what a book is about and the grade level for which the book is appropriate. Websites like the School Library Journal and Booklist post reviews and, since librarians can not read everything before ordering a book, books do get ordered that are not necessarily age appropriate.

My wife ordered a book for her library in The Princess Diaries series that was listed as a young adult book, which encompasses late middle school children. She decided to read the book before putting it on the shelves, only to find that the first thirty pages dealt with nothing but the main character’s desire to begin a sexual relationship with a friend.

Some middle school children do have to deal with this debate of how far they want to take their relationships, and my wife believes that there is nothing wrong with a book that shows that the characters think it out and understand that there are consequences. However, this novel made it seem that sex by young teens is all good fun and that the main character should have sex with a former love interest to “get him back.”

I believe that my wife made a wise decision because the book did not portray sex as serious issue, and impressionable teens need to understand the potential consequences before they make a potentially life-altering decision.

I do agree that there are limitations to what children should be able to walk into their school library and check out, and I do believe that more discretion should be used in a middle school library than in a high school or public library.

I believe that a public library should never shy away from a book because someone finds it offensive.

On the contrary, I agree with Alan Bundy in his December 2004 article, Public Libraries Should Offend Everyone. Does Yours?, published in Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services. Blundy says that

Libraries, in doing their job properly , must not just accept that they will offend someone in the community. They should capitalize on their unique role and special responsibility for a free and democratic society, and be confident and proud to do so.

The American Library Association’s magazine, American Libraries, published a list of twelve ways libraries are good for the country. Reason ten is that “Libraries offend everyone.”

I believe in the words of Jo Godwin, who said that

A truly great library contains something in it to offend everyone.

American Libraries says that this willingness to have something that offends everyone means that a library will have books that cover every side of an issue that would good for the nation’s citizens.

Children’s librarian Dorothy Broderick says that every library in the country should have a sign that reads:

This library has something offensive to everyone. If you are not offended by something we own, please complain.

We probably will not ever see this sign at the entrance to every library, but I would welcome this thought process in all libraries.

Books have been around ever since man can remember.  Reading a book is one of the most popular past-times, whenever a person is looking to pass some time, they usually read a book. Books are practically sold anywhere a person goes, from book-stores (go figure) to even gas-stations. Almost every town has a library where a person can go to check out any book that excites them. If for some strange reason that the town does not have a library, there has to be a library within close driving distance. Many people read books for different reasons, some because they have to maybe for a homework assignment and some just enjoy to read. Books do not all come in the same forms, there are hard-back books, paper-backs and textbooks for educational purposes.

When I was little, I had an everyday routine. I would wake up, get a bowl of cereal and watch cartoons until it was time for school. After school I would come home and play with my friends in front of my house for a little until the street lights came on and then I would go inside and eat dinner. Once i devoured dinner, it would be time for me to get ready for bed. The ONLY way I would be able to fall asleep was if my mom came in my room and read me a goodnight story. This was my first ever experiece with a book. I dont remember an exact name of  a book that she read me, but I do remember the colorful pictures and exciting stories. My mother would continue to read these stories to me every night until I learned how to read and began to read to myself.

I may not look like a person who likes to read on a daily basis but I actually am. Whenever I am having a tough time going to sleep at night, I will turn on my light and read until I fall asleep. One of my favorite places to read though has go to be when the baseball team is traveling to an away game. We have a game in North Carolina that is an eight hour drive and there is nothing i would rether do than to read. One of my favorite books of all-time has go to be the autobiography of Bo Jackson. The book is a favorite of mine because it talks about his rough childhood and the trials and tribulations he went through playing football and baseball at Auburn University.

Books were apart of my life growing up and will always be apart of society.

Why is it that everything has to be digital nowadays. I don’t understand how something as simple as a book can be turned into some big piece of technology such as the Kindle, a digital way to download and read hundreds of books on this one machine. This seems like a good idea only because of the amount of space and trees this thing saves. The problems with the Kindle outweigh the advantages in my opinion. I perfer reading one book at a time so having more than one book available isn’t really necessary or worth the $299 that the machine costs. Another disadvantage for the Kindle is it’s durability, if it is dropped the screen can crack or the hard drive can break. Regular paperback or hardcover books are more durable than these things and cannot be ruined by something like rain or a drop.

Another new piece of technology that is trying to replace books is the Ipod. Itunes now sells books for the Iphone and Ipod touch for $1.99 to $6.99 for the application to read books on the go. The selection is not great, but its there. The problem with reading on an Iphone or an Ipod touch is that the text is very small and it can be out unnecessary strain on the eyes along with the screen being backlit. Overall I think that technology is going too far by taking things that are as simple as books and overcomplicating  them.

Books have become an integrated part of our society today.  Books are everywhere these days.  There is normally a public library in every town in the country.  If a town doesn’t have its own public library there is normally one in a neighboring town within close driving distance.  Bookstores, such as Barnes and Noble and Books A Million, have become an easily recognized landmark in each town and are normally filled with many customers.  Books are also an important part of the education system in today’s world.  Nearly every class in today’s schools are taught using a textbook.  Teachers are also encouraging their students to read for pleasure to increase their knowledge and broaden their horizons.  Although many students are reluctant to read outside of school, the few that do venture in to try it have found a real deep appreciation for the world of books. 

My earliest recollections of books were in my early childhood years.  I was introduced to books even before I could read for myself.  I would always enjoying looking at books and viewing the pictures inside of those books.  I had my own bookshelf in my room beside crib and would always wake up before my parents and grab a book off of the shelf and look at the pictures until my parents woke up.  Some of my other early recollections of books was the Bible.  I was always brought up in a Christian home with Christian parents and was always taught the stories of the Bible.  I used to love enjoy reading the stories in the Bible that I always heard about when I was a little kid.  It was good to see the real intrepretation of the stories that you heard about in Sunday school.  I also have learned to read the Bible as I have gotten older to grow in my faith and depend on God in all my circumstances.  The Bible is full of many postive and uplifting scriptures that can bring encouragement to anybody who accepts it.  I also have a deep appreciation for books from my kindegarten class.  When I was first learning to read, my teacher would give us these little books that were for beginning readers with simple sentences inside of them.  We would have reading groups everyday and our teacher would give out badges for the day for the fastest reader and also for the best reader.  If you received a badge you were allowed to wear it for the rest of the day and wear it home to show your parents your accomplishment.  I would always pride myself on trying to aim for one of these badges.

I normally don’t read books for enjoyment as much as I would like to due to my time constraints with basketball.  But I do enjoy reading when I have the chance.  I enjoy reading sports related books.  Normally a story a former or current coach as written on his philsophies of the game or perhaps some of the life lessons he has learned during his coaching career.  I enjoy reading these types of books because I want to become a coach one day and these help me learn lessons from coaches that have already gone before me and talk about some of the jobs of a coach, what the players they coached were like, or even the championship season they had or the worst season in school history.  Coaches always provide insight that can potentially help me one day in my future coaching career.

Books have become a popular leisure item in today’s society.  Many people read books for enjoyment in their spare time.  Being a college student, I have kind of grown to find an appreciation of books that I maybe might never have had.

Paula Rogers
Com 101
Duncan
Chapter 10: Question 5

5). Why do you think the availability of television and cable hasn’t substantially decreased the number of new book titles available each year? What do books offer that television doesn’t?
Since before the invention of the printing press, books have been used as a means to help people understand ideas that transcend their own experiences. With the invention of new technologies books have perhaps became less popular, yet their foothold within society has never diminished strangely enough. Books have the ability to allow for the expansion of human imagination, intelligence, and simple comprehension skills. In a recent conversation I had about books and reading with a fellow Anderson University student, some of these concepts were made even clearer to me, especially the concept of how books can provide comprehension skills. In this conversation, the student talked about how she remembered the numerous comprehension tests in school that involved reading and recall. She went on to say that never once was a television brought in to test her comprehension, and that it was almost impossible to think of a teacher using such a medium to convey this concept. From this conversation, I went on to consider this idea when thinking about how to answer the question of what books offer over television. Why is it that books are used in such ways, while television isn’t?
Firstly, I believe that books offer a non-passive form of entertainment and learning. While television is a powerful medium that provides both video and audio functions in one system, it does not usually engage its audience actively in the same way a book can. Our hands, our eyes, and our active minds and imaginations are constantly being put to use while reading a book. We are able to connect and visualize with characters in a book more readily than those portrayed on the glowing screen of a television simply because we virtually have to in order to understand and appreciate what we read.
Another thing I believe that books offer that television doesn’t is the ability to bypass most of the cultural standards that are constantly being shown in television shows. With television shows, such as the CW’s One Tree Hill or Fox’s new show Glee, cultural stereotypes are the norm. While both of these shows may be entertaining, the feelings of acceptance due to financial situations, class, race, ideal body types, etc are almost always dependent on the cultural standards of today. With books, however, all of these things are left to the reader’s imagination. Even when the author provides specific detail, chances are those reading a book are forming their “own” mental pictures of the scene and characters in their head, without the restraints of cultural standards.
Lastly, books don’t suffer from the same restrictions that govern many television and cable shows. Television suffers from so much censorship nowadays, that it seems that almost every show on is a carbon copy of another in terms of plot outline or setup. Nothing hardly stands out as unique or special anymore, and those that do are often found on specialized cable channels such as HBO or Showtime. With books, there are always the elements of the unique within them. Even when books follow the trends of the day, as can be seen with the numerous publications dealing with vampires lately, they can be as uncensored as the Sookie Stackhouse novels or as tame as the Twilight ones. The stories can be so different, the characters so diverse, the plot so uncensored that one is able to explore the inner workings of their imagination even while reading a related subject.
Books will always allow for the human imagination, even despite the prevalence of television. The way that books can transform characters, transcend censorship, and explore cultures and standards not typical of today are what makes books so lasting in a television world.

Chapter 10, Question #5

The intimacy of books is what keeps readers attracted to them, unlike television or cable reading is a one on one pastime that requires full attention, quiet time and a place just to get away, something that no one has given up yet. Yes, there has been a decline of book sales since the invention and production of television, but this may be one thing that will stand the test of time. As like the television and cable shows offer different genres of shows and programs, so do books, and it is seen that books have actually inspired many of the famous movies. Seeing that books have influenced TV shows and movies is another example that I think books will never be replaced.
Like acknowledged before, books and the readers develop a relationship, connection that no one else can share, you become deeply involved and interested. Writers know how to draw in ones attention and fascination that is hard for television to hold on to some times.
Books, as is television have come and are continuing to come along far in todays lifestlye; competing with the television and media. We are now seeing books being ready available with iPods and Kindle, which for some might be just as good as flipping pages by yourself. As a result we can see books keeping up with the times, and it is safe to say that we don’t have to worry about saying goodbye to books anytime soon.

Almost everyone around the world, including me have chaotic schedules. Driving here, running there, or waiting in endless lines, so various people do not have time to sit down and read a book; but with technology continually exceeding we now have the ability to multitask with portable devices such as the iPod or a Kindle.
I would choose to read a book on a Kindle instead of an iPod. I travel a lot, especially with volleyball, sometimes up to six hours and an iPods battery does not last very long, while a Kindle can go several days without charging. On top of a heavy suitcase, because of my volleyball gear, I do not want to carry my heavy school books back in forth from my dorm, to the hotel, to the bus, the gym and then back to my dorm, when a Kindle is lighter than a paperback book weighing in at ten ounces. Unlike the iPhone where you have to pay for internet and contracts, the Kindle is simple, no hunting for Wi-Fi spots and no annual fees. If I was sitting outside and finished reading a book in a series, I can search and buy the next novel at my fingertips. Simplicity.
Kindle2 New Wireless Reading Device on YouTube