Response to On ***** Media

                I enjoyed the piece, but was surprised by the author’s weighted importance on linguistics and language. I, myself, am a visual person. To me, displaying a statement in graphics with bright, bold letters can have more of an effect than the wording of the verbalization. Therefore, I liked the idea of cross media and hybrid media in the early 20^th century, as well as the TV commercial more recently. This part of media interests me the most because I believe even a 30 second visual clip can be powerful. One example of this is a recent article I read with a truly powerful video with the message ‘giving is the best communication’ http://gawker.com/this-three-minute-commercial-puts-full-length-hollywood-1309506149. The article discussed how this three minute Thai commercial was more powerful than a detailed Hollywood movie or the likes. I think this really captures the author’s discussion of commercials defining consumer culture and global media. I agree with that commercials carry globalized messages and have the ability to impact a large group. 

                I also found the notion of “fool[ing] the eye” intriguing because I think it relates well to the project we are currently working on in class (Page 2). What is the difference between using a YouTube video that was taped live and true live footage? I believe it has to do with the author and the editing. The person using their own live footage taped it the way they want it to be. They know how it was edited- or even if it is raw footage. The videographer knows his or her own clips best. Fooling the eye refers to reproducing reality, so that the viewer cannot notice the difference between the original and the copy. I believe this is possible because technology is advancing to make reproduction more possible. In addition, I believe the tech-savvy generation is less aware of their eyes being tricked because we are used to it. With these factors under consideration, the constructed reality is limitless via media.