Friday, May 4, 2012

TV and "South Park"

        It wasn’t long before television followed radio, our first source of “technology” in relaying messages or providing entertainment faster than print.  TV today is a common medium that is rare to not be in an American home, seeing that it can be both informative and a way to unwind or relax by simply “vegging” out.  However, even if we are just using TV as entertainment, today’s entertainment often can be focused on what goes on around or what is happening in the news world.  The presenters of "South Park", a TV show that has been on air for over 15 seasons, discussed the idea that while "South Park" holds an entertainment factor and is mainly intended to be perceived as entertainment it also mocks real life situations and even what we had considered news.  Even though it is unique in form, "South Park" still follows John Fiske’s “The codes of television” in our Moodle reading of “Television Culture”.  Fiske describes the three levels of code that television follows as “Reality”, “Representation” and “Ideology”.
        "South Park" was also discussed as not being a racist show, but rather a show that makes light of those who are racist.  The group talked about how "South Park" has stopped at nothing and therefore redeems itself of simply showing us in humor what a racist society we are, but it made me ask myself, ‘Am I O.K. with laughing at something that while it claims to be pointing out racism is still making racist comments and remarks that are considered humorous therefore bending a societal depiction of racism?’  Here’s my opinion, "South Park" has taken the racism of American culture and simple humored it so it appeals to their audience as something that’s funny and yet managed to make some believe that it is not the show itself that is racist, but rather society and they (creators of "South Park") are simply pointing it out, when in reality they have provided a humorous outlet for those who watch to believe that it is O.K. and well accepted (sadly this is becoming true more and more) in American culture.  
          I find it interesting that more people seem to think that is a funny way to look at serious situations.  It’s not about the fact that ‘at least "South Park" is bringing certain issues into the light’, it’s about the fact that no one has stopped them from doing it in such a hurtful, often disrespectful, and extremely racist way.  I think that American society should care about what is being discussed in "South Park", or at least how it is being discussed.  I don’t think it is O.K. to cultural generations into thinking that it is educated to take a racist view on EVERYTHING.  Whether it’s funny or not. 



money, money, moneyball

        Wow, just when I thought I knew a little something about baseball, history is revealed.  Moneyball (2011) was one of the year’s highly acclaimed movies.  We found it at the Academy Awards with a Best Motion Picture nomination, Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role nomination, Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role nomination, and three other Oscar nominations.  It seems safe to say that prior to this movie, non-baseball fanatics had no clue about the legendary acts of Billy Beane, General Manager for the Oakland Athletics, and his acts of making baseball history, but thanks to Hollywood, the suave Brad Pitt and the willing to share Beane, a new populations now understands a little bit more about baseball and the Oakland A’s.

        Beane offered to share his story for the screen and showed American’s that a lot of hard work can pay off!  The idea that Beane and his newly hired Assistant General Manager, Peter Brand, contrive is to build a team based on hitting and on base percentage.  However, Beane was working with a mere $38 million compared to the Yankees $120 million budget.  One of my favorite things that the moneyball presenters talked about was the basic old world disorder-new world order difference.  The old world elements from this film is that money is power, the idea that the more money you (team manager) had, the better players you could buy.  In fact, the movie has a great scene showing us that’s exactly what the money was all about... to put players where you did and didn’t want them.  The scene where Pitt tells one of the team’s players that the reason he is the highest paid is because the Yankees are paying part of his salary to make sure he stays off their team.  The new world link that we see is that knowledge becomes power.  As Brand and Beane  construct new methods into finding good enough players using numbers and knowledge.
       The connection that I had also made when watching the movie, and the group briefly mentioned, was the relationship between Beane and the players, and for that matter, the realization of most general managers and their relationship with the team’s players.  Beane, in the movie, avoids all personal relationship with his players, and one of the players recognizes this as a Beane distancing himself so it would be easier on him if and when he needed to cut players.  There was also the movie element which resembled the master vs. slave relationship.  The manager is in total control of who plays for that team, and who doesn’t.  The “slaves” (players) must work at be the exact product the master needs them to be in order to result in a winning team.  
       These are just a few examples on how we can link this recent motion picture to old world disorder and new world order.  In retrospect I also saw this movie as very relatable to today’s culture and economy.  Baseball has been a huge part of America for quite some time, and the whole idea behind Moneyball is that Beane is working with a limited amount of money but has to buy the best money can... in a sense it’s all about the money and how far it will get you.  It’s interesting to see the contrast of what “America wants” and what Beane has to strategize to try and buy, and strategize he does!