Over the past few years, it has truly become apparent that "Freedom" of Speech comes with a price, and in the case of the Dixie Chicks, it came with a very large price: their careers and fans. That is only the half of it though, they also were in fear of losing their lives, their fame and their right to just be "normal people." [1]
At the Dixie Chicks show in London, England, they rightfully voiced their opinion siding with the English view of the war in Iraq stating that they were, "ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas." From here the whole story snowballed and they recieved not only harsh criticisms for their words, but their fans and the public started to boycott them, leading the Dixie Chicks into a downward spiral putting their careers at a halt. [1]
A few years after Bush's grand re-election as President, things started to go wrong in his office, and the public began to slowly detest George Bush. A number of other celebrities also decided to join the bandwagon, and create songs that are still considered politically offensive. For example, P!nk came out with a song titled 'Dear Mr. President,' which is known for its crude words that completely rip apart anything the former President has ever done. Throughout the song she repeatedly recalls on all of the situations he promised to fix and failed, his past as well as what kind of father figure he is. [5] Here take a look for yourself, and compare it to the previous statement of Natalie Maines, which one do you think is truly more controversial and offensive?
[3]
Other celebrities who also spoke up against the government include Kanye West with his comment on live television stating that "George Bush doesn't like black people"[4] and Pearl Jam, who in case you do not know is a band that was huge a few years back displaying more of a soft rock genre. But what happened to these celebrities careers? Were they glared down upon like the Dixie Chicks were after their comment? To be honest, it was far from. If anything, these celebrities and bands managed to gain more fame after the release of their statements and songs.
This incident leads to the questions of whether or not "Freedom" of Speech is really free, and why the Dixie Chicks, but no one else?
I believe that the sole reasoning behind this is timing. [1]At the time when the Dixie Chicks released their commentary, George Bush was still seen as a brilliant man to have in power and had many supporters, especially in the South. As a result, many of their fans turned on them to make an equally harsh statement against the Dixie Chicks, as a way to say that they had been insulted by the Natalie's words. In the case of P!nk, Kanye West and Pearl Jam, by the time their commentary and audio had been released, the majority of the public had growing distaste for the President of that time, so their comments were viewed with a better outlook, seeing as most people agreed with what was being said. Their songs were much more about the social issues that were not being addressed, which easily gained support seeing as most of the United States was left facing at least one of these problems. America felt that since they could not say anything, at least stars such as these three, were working to get the public's voices heard.

Somewhat contradictory to my previous paragrapgh though, my personal opinion is that although everyone is entitled to free speech and their own opinions, celebrities should leave their personal comments, especially regarding such social issues that affect the whole world, out of their performances. Celebrities are prime examples of people with power, and this power can quite easily influence many others. When a person with power states something extremely controversial in front of a large group of people, especially about an issue that they are facing at the time of the comment, it seems as if they are trying to make the audience agree, and sometimes conform, to their personal beliefs, which power can help do. Problem is, celebrities do not quite understand the blow that can sometimes follow after their actions, and are not ready to deal with this.

This belief is what led people to believe that celebrities should just "Shut Up and Sing." Celebrities are given too much power, especially in front of millions with a microphone to their mouth, and they really need to be careful with what they say if they are not ready to deal with the raff of things.

Another belief as to why only the Dixie Chicks were heavily criticized is because, throughout the years they have only continued to gain more and more fame, and people felt the need that they needed to be slowed down, and have some power taken away. After Natalie Maine's statement, it seemed as if it would be the perfect time to twist her words to make it seem as though she had committed the most heinous crime, which would ultimately bring them back down to a level of normality.[1]

All in all though, I think it is quite obvious that Freedom of Speech does have its rebounds leaving behind a costly consequence and although everyone is legally entitled to state their own opinion, they need to be careful because they can easily influence just about anyone with the amount of power that they hold. BUT, their statements can also help raise awareness on certain social issues, or even help get the voice of many heard, when they can't do it themselves. This matter is truly divisive, but just remember there is no such thing as "Freedom" of Speech.

For other artists who have cretaed politically offensive music check out this list: [2]

P!nk - Dear Mr. President
Kanye West - American Red Cross Centre Relief Fund comments
Beastie Boys - In a World Gone Mad
Lenny Kravitz - We Want Peace
Luka Bloom - I'm Not at War with Anyone
Green Day - Life During War Time

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixie_Chicks
[2]http://www.inthe00s.com/archive/membersonly/smf/1106014002.shtml
[3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eRApNHSRRk
[4]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090300165.html
[5]http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/pink/dearmrpresident.html

"What the Croc?"

Early this morning, at 9:30, it was released that the ever so "fashionable" French company, Hermes, has come up with a new plan to make even more of their ever so popular leather bags. Except now instead of using traditional skins to make the leather, the company has succumbed to using crocodile skin to make their precious bags. [1]

The story goes on though... Not only are they using crocodile skin to make these bags, they have also released that it actually takes them between three and four crocodiles to make ONE bag, which can sell for $50, 000! They claim that these purses are on hot and high demand, and many people who are desperate to have all of the latest fashions, are willing to wait over a year just to have their bag custom made.[1] Let's be honest though, fashion styles change constantly, and by the time these customers finally receive their expensive purses, chances are the styles will have changed and their bags will be worthless.

Hermes hasn't quite thought this far ahead though, because they have gone on to set up their own crocodile farms in Australia. The crocodiles bred here will be used strictly to make these bags. The chief executive of Hermes, Patrick Thomas, sums his side of the story up by saying:

"It can take three to four crocodiles to make one of our bags so we are now breeding our own crocodiles on our own farms, mainly in Australia," says Patrick Thomas, chief executive of the luxury line. "Hermes already faces a major challenge producing 3,000 crocodile bags a year. The world is not full of crocodiles, except the stock exchange!" [2]

Hermes makes it seem as if killing off that many poor innocent animals is no big deal, and a common, daily occurence. Well apparently for this luxury company it is, and they somewhat laugh it off. Fortunately, this news quickly spread throughout the public, and PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) was informed almost immediately.

Just in case, you do not know what PETA is, the easiest way to understand what they are all about is to read and analyze their mission statement, which is as follows:

"PETA works through public education, cruelty investigations, research, animal rescue, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement, and protest campaigns to focus its attention on the four areas in which the largest numbers of animals suffer the most intensely for the longest periods of time: on factory farms, in laboratories, in the clothing trade, and in the entertainment industry. We also work on a variety of other issues, including the cruel killing of beavers, birds and other "pests," and the abuse of backyard dogs. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), with more than 2.0 million members and supporters, is the largest animal rights organization in the world." [3]

After reading this, you can really only imagine how outraged they were about the craziness of the new Hermes plan. The group also released an announcement, stating:

"The thought of purposely breeding and killing crocodiles for an outdated, overpriced handbag should make any fashionista's skin crawl. If Hermes really wants to be a leader in the fashion industry, it should stop killing animals for cold-blooded vanity and use cruelty-free mock croc and fake snake instead.
As Pink—who recently provided the voice of a computer-generated crocodile in PETA's "Stolen for Fashion" commercial—says killing animals for their skins is so disgusting that it doesn't make me want to befriend designers who use them." [2]

The commercial referred to in the clip shows just how wrong it is to use animal skins to make materialistic objects. It basically explains how cruel it is to the animals and how using their fur is "stealing," but it does so in an animated format that helps catch the viewers attention. Take a look for yourself:



[4]

To be honest, I think this whole matter is really upsetting, like don't get me wrong I am not an activist and do think leather bags are quite nice, but the act of killing the crocodiles is completely wrong and unnecessary. It appears most people are agreeing with me on this matter too. Peta's Blog, titled "Leather is NOT a 'Luxury,'" describes how inhumanely the animals' skin is being taken off of these poor innocent creatures. It explains that half the time the animals are still alive while being skinned, meaning they are able to cry out in distress and feel all of the pain. [5]Another blogger, Perez Hilton, wrote a blog called "What the Croc?" talking about the issue. His latest comment update? "Faux is in." [2] These two other blogs, although they address the issue differently, have recieved numerous comments also claiming that the making of these fashion handbags is wrong, and far from being legit.

SO, here's the question, if all of these readers are complaining, how many people throughout the world are actually against the idea of crocodile leather bags? And for all of these people how many agree with the process and would buy the bags if given the chance? Up to now, no polls have been fully established or posted, so I would like to start one myself:

Hermes or PETA: which side are you on?
a.) Hermes
b.) PETA
c.) This really doesn't affect me, and I dont have an opinion.

VS

[1] http://www.myfashionlife.com/archives/2009/06/11/peta-snap-at-hermes/

[2]http://perezhilton.com/2009-06-10-what-the-croc-peta-responds

[3]http://www.peta.org/about/index.asp

[4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRqu1vW03b4

[5]http://blog.peta.org/archives/2009/06/peta_to_hermes.php

Andy Samburg, Bruno, Twilight, and Awards. What more can you ask for?

[8]


Lights, Camera, Action! Once again the MTV Movie Awards have come and gone, but this year there were many surprises making them just that much more funny and creative. From seeing some of the, well...interesting, fashion choices of the celebrities and the one and only Andy Samburg, to the exclusive premiere of Twilight: The New Moon and the hilarious Bruno entrance. This years MTV Movie Awards have been rated as the best so far, and the most entertaining, receiving a 4.8 rating which is the highest since 2004.

Right from the get-go, the Movie Awards, were absolutely hilarious and had everyone on the edge of their seats, entertained to the maximum. Andy Samburg, was a creative genius again, with an introduction involving all of the hit artists and the hottest movies of the year. He then moved on to the first performance of the night: a creative remix by Andy Samburg, mocking all of the biggest celebrities. From here the night just continued to get better.

One of the major subjects that was throughout the tabloids and posted all over the internet the next day, was the fashion. Some of the stars came sporting the latest styles, while others were a complete flop. Like where are the "fashion police" when you need them? Check it out for yourself...[2][3]

BEST DRESSED

CONGRATS KRISTEN BELL AND LEIGHTON MEISTER FOR LOOKING SMASHING YET AGAIN

WORST DRESSED

For two goodlooking girls, Meghan Fox and Lauren Conrad definitely weren't looking too "hot," but in Meghan's defence maybe she just got out of the shower...

In general though, the men of the evening were looking pretty slick and fly. It is pretty safe to say that none of the men could be classified as being in the "Worst Dressed" category. and as a plus I'm pretty sure Robert Pattison showered and put on deoderant... well at least for the evening. [2]

Of course, awards were another huge part of the night. All though numerous people were nominated for each of the different types of awards, the list was narrowed down to these fine winners who received a popcorn trophy for their accomplishments: [4]

Breakthrough Performance Female: Ashley Tisdale, High School Musical 3
Best Fight: Robert Pattinson vs. Cam Gigandet, Twilight
Breakthrough Performance Male: Robert Pattinson, Twilight
Best Male Performance: Zac Efron, High School Musical 3
Best Kiss: Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart, Twilight
Best WTF Moment: Amy Poehler, Baby Mama
Best Song From a Movie: Miley Cyrus, “The Climb”
Generation Award: Ben Stiller
Best Female Performance: Kristen Stewart, Twilight
Best Comedic Performance: Jim Carrey, Yes Man
Best Movie: Twilight

Oh and Yes, it's true, Twilight, as expected after all the hype, won a grand total of 5 popcorn trophies. BUT, this isn't the only reason that the MTV Movie Awards were a big night for the Twilight cast, they also revealed their sneak peek for the next movie in the Twilight Saga...

hey baby, want to go for a ride ;)

Believe it or not, a whooping 2,268 of these mad machines were sold.

Yeah, they're pretty embarassing .

Who Cares.... You Should.

How many people watch TV? I had never sought to answer this question until I was asked to look at why diversity in the media matters. It was a good eye opener as it made me realize the millions, maybe billions, of people around the World who watch TV everyday, who either don't realize what they are seeing,or are personally affected by the negative stereotypes. We all fail to notice what is being represented or and what is not, and how these subtle messages affect us.

Over the past few weeks, we have been talking about how ethnic diversity in front and behind the cameras is almost non-existent, meaning that the majority of people working in the media business are predominately caucasian, with few 'minorities' being represented. To further this point, in the article, "The Great Black Hope," it talks about how the majority of people working behind the scenes are middle-aged white males, giving us a pretty biased opinion on the world and the people in it, thus creating many of the stereotypes we fail to recognize every time we turn on the television.[1] So since the media business is run predominately by the Caucasian portion of the world, the different ethnic groups are being poorly represented compared to the percentage of the world who are made up by these "other" races. A study, also in the article "The Great Black Hope," compared the two. [1]

The first portion showed the average representation for the 5 major broadcasting networks, including ABC, NBC, FOX, CBS, and CW with results as follows:



Caucasian: 74.72%

African American: 13.92%

Latinos/ Hispanics: 6.38%

Asian: 4.5%

American Indian: 0.48%

While the second half of the study showed the 2007 Census data showed the real diversity of the U.S.A with results as follows:



Caucasian: 66.2%

African American: 12.9%

Latinos/ Hispanics: 15.2%

Asian: 4.5%

American Indian: 1%


As you can see this data shows that, on these 5 major networks, Caucasians are being way over represented(8.52%), while African Americans are being slightly over represented (1.02%). On the other hand, Latinos/Hispanics are being unbelievably under represented in the media (8.82%), as well as American Indians (0.52%). The only ethnic group who is being perfectly represented in the media is Asian. These statistics really make you realize how far off the portrayals of the different races are from the actual population.

On top of this, another study known as, Children Now's Fall Colours Prime Time Diversity Report for 2003-2004, recorded that: [2]

From here, you start to wonder how these people must see themselves when they are minimally shown in the spotlight. Is this a sign of racism? Or is it just freedom of speech being stretched to it's fullest form? These questions are ones we must consider in order to correctly analyze the media product, and realize just how anti-racial it truly is.

From here though we also must realize how it is almost impossible for one group of people to perfectly portray the "other groups", or at least to portray them as well as they could portray themselves. This means that we are being given the wrong idea about the "other," leading many people to view these groups through the wrong perspective. Also, it is almost impossible for a group trying to represent itself in the media, not to portray themselves as the "good," without commonly portraying the "other" in a more negative light. Seeing as the media is mainly run by Caucasians they become the majority of characters in the media being shown, as discussed before, as "the good," while the other races in the world are immediately deemed minor roles and are commonly portrayed as "the bad." For example, almost always, Arabs are shown as the violent, American-hating terrorists with plans of mass murder, Latinos/ Hispanics are shown as criminals or maids, African-Americans are always the sidekicks, gangsters, and the criminals(as well as all of the roles shown in the film called "Black Acting School"). While Aboriginals, if they are even represented at all, are always shown as the exotic and Asians as the convenience store owners, operators of a dry cleaning service, take-out food business or the extremely smart. All of these roles are considered stereotypical, and can be taken as truly offensive to the people belonging to these cultures. The world that they create for us to see in the media, is far from how the real world is.



The strange thing is, it is almost as if our society is moving back in time limiting peoples rights in the media. At one stage almost all of the groups were most closely represented to the actuality of the numbers than they are know, meaning our society is backtracking in its footsteps. The cause of this is due to major events throughout the world. It is often said that `Hollywood and Washington are from the same DNA` because when something happens in politics involving different groups of people are the world, they are portrayed the same way in the media to help create a biased opinion of the other. Also it is slightly strange since some of these topics were starting to be addressed around 2003. This means that we are doing the complete opposite and are making issues worse than to start with. If we keep going at a rate as we are now, the idea of different ethnic groups being shown in the media is going to compeltely fade away and we will once again be left with the idea of Caucasians as being the only good background to be.

Unfortunately people fail to realize this, and commonly are oblivious or believe the stereotypes being portrayed, and since not enough of us are aware of the impact the media makes, there aren't enough people to do anything drastic to change this. But for those of us who have been made aware of the hurtful stereotypes and inappropriate portrayals, they have decided to start giving people of the minority races jobs in the backgrounds of the production of all media products, whose main focus is on lowering the idea of the minority, and creating equal numbers of majorities of different backgrounds. Also, by making more people aware of these stereotypes and uneven representation, hopefully we can make everyone equals once again.

Ethnic Diversity: "the state or face of being diverse; difference; unlikeness; variety; multiformity; point of difference." [3] This is what truly matters. It affects all of everyone and anyone and we should all be more aware of the actions of our media products. We need to embrace the definition of diversity and make it actuality, and ignore the idea's of stereotypes and creating "enemies" for ourselves. Once we can do this, we will all realize just how important ethnic diversity in the media matters. The media should represent real life not a fictional one that a group of Caucasian males has produced for us.

[1] "TV's Great Black Hope" Entertainment Weekly Online Article. Jennifer Armstrong. Margeaux Watson. <http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20206185,00.html>

[2] "The Children Now Fall Colours Prime Time Diversity Report for 2003-2004." <http://publications.childrennow.org/assets/pdf/cmp/fall-colors-03/fall-colors-03-v5.pdf>

[3] "Diversity Definition." Dictionary.com. April 30, 2009. <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diversity >

Oh Miley.

Miley Cyrus has always been known as the good little girl who is well known for her pop music, until recently when she posed for the cover of Vanity Fair half naked, which aroused questions of Miley's true intentions. Even more updated though, pictures of Miley and her friends making "Asian eyes" have been leaked on to the Internet arousing questions such as "was she simply making a goofy face, or should she be held accountable for 'mocking and denigerating individuals of Asian decent'?"

While I believe that Miley and her friends had just gotten caught up in the moment of a photo op, I also understand how this picture could be taken as offensive and racy. She is old enough to know that mocking the way someone looks or even mocking a culture is completely unacceptable, which makes her compeltely liable for her actions in this photo.

People failed to realize this concept though and bcause she has, up to recent events, had a reputation of being quite the good girl, people started sticking up for her saying that she was just having a fun moment. Which leads me to my next point, if it isn't proof enough that she is actually making fun of Asians take a look at the guy in the background of the picture who is making the classic "V symbol" or peace sign, which is also very stereotypically known to be related to Asians. Also, note how the guy of Asian decent in the picture isn't joining in on the pose. At this point it should be clear that Miley and her friends were indeed making fun of the appearance of Asians, thus contributing to the stereotypes.

Many of her fans are also young girls who are easily influenced by their favourite stars, and when pictures of Miley are released like these ones, she is setting a horrible example for these girls to follow. An Asian advocacy group even stated that, "The photograph of Miley Cyrus and other individuals slanting their eyes currently circulating the Internet is offensive to the Asian Pacific American community and sets a terrible example for her many young fans. The image falls within a long and unfortunate history of people mocking and denigerating individuals of Asian decent." This proves that many people took the picture to heart and that the picture should in fact be declared racy and unacceptable on Cyrus' behalf. The other factor that was never quite mentioned is that in the photo there are glasses full of what appear to be alcohol and she is sitting on some guy's lap. Things like this are quite common, but she is only 15 and it continues to influence kids in quite the wrong way. They believe that because Miley is doing it, they can too, which will only get them in trouble in the future, as Miley is now.

The Asian advocacy group went on to say that all they hope is that Miley apologizes for her rude behaviour, and turns out she has. On her personal web blog she wrote, : "

I’ve also been told there are some people upset about some pictures taken of me with friends making goofy faces! Well, I’m sorry if those people looked at those pics and took them wrong and out of context!
In NO way was I making fun of any ethnicity! I was simply making a goofy face. When did that become newsworthy? It seems someone is trying to make something out of nothing to me. If that would of been anyone else, it would of been overlooked! I definitely feel like the press is trying to make me out as the new ‘BAD GIRL’!
I feel like now that Britney is back on top of her game again, they need someone to pick on! Lucky me! haha Anyway, I just wanted to let you guys know what is on my heart. You guys know me and have been by my side every step of the way! You guys know my heart and know the most important things to me are my friends, family, fans, and GOD! In NO WAY do I want to disappoint any of you! But, when I have made mistakes in the past, I feel like I’ve owned up to them and apologized." [1]

Even in her apology she stated that she was just making a "goofy face", but doesn't that make it seem as though she is relating the way Asian's eyes slant to being goofy? I dont know about you, but I was raised where it was never okay to mock the way someone else looks, dresses or talks, but it appears these lessons weren't quite clear to Miley.

But she got her consequences and is now banned from China, meaning not only is she no longer allowed in the country, but the government is also banning the broadcast of any of her TV shows, films, and merchandise sales.[2] For now, the ban is apparently indefinite. Looks like Disney won't be too happy.

All in all though, at least she is apologizing and hopefully after this Miley Cyrus has learned her lesson to be more careful with what she does and learns that there is a difference between having fun and being racist.

[1]http://yaleaasablog.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/a-goofy-face/

[2] http://weeklyworldnews.com/tag/miley-cyrus-banned-from-china/

MOVIE UPDATE 2!

So the stories of monsters and aliens sharing the same world as we do, have been passed on throughout the ages. Usually in these stories, though it is people vs. the unknown, except now the roles are changing. It becomes a duel between monsters vs. aliens: one trying to protect the humans the other trying to take over the world. Monsters vs. Aliens is a hilarious movie that makes people of all ages fall in love with cartoons once again. It is another movie I highly recommend you go see. The only question left is: 'Whose side will you be on? Monsters? or Aliens?' Go see the movie and decide for yourself. :)