# data[].attributes.headline
(JCB) Appendix (401-424)  Advertising/Research methods

# data[].attributes.subject
(JCB) Appendix (401-424)  Advertising/Research methods

# data[].attributes.body
Advertising is one of the most important things in modern-day society because it's the way that businesses reach out to a large audience of people to gain money. I see advertising all the time and in nearly every place possible, from watching YouTube videos to seeing billboards to seeing flyers on building windows, etc. it's interesting to see that many people that are advertising them and their business are always starting off by who they are and their biggest accomplishments, to show off how credible of a person they are. I think this puts the idea into the heads of many people that because they are credible and they have this verified background, the product that they are endorsing or the idea that they are trying to the market is also of the same quality.

After learning about the research methods that sociologists use to conduct research, I was able to understand the nature behind advertising.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) 29-47: Henslin, Doing Sociological Research

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) 29-47: Henslin, Doing Sociological Research

# data[].attributes.body
Symbolic interactionism is the study of social interactions that are mainly carried out by gestures and physical movements. Unknowingly, simple gestures and physical movements carry a lot of expression and emotion that we are unaware of from time to time. I learned about the theory known as the functionalist theory which says that society will be shown through the macro-level orientation. there is one other three that I learned about called the conflict theory which states that social institutions acted as a form of a struggle between other classes to maintain equality and this tied in with symbolic interactionism. Symbolic interactionism could also be understanding gestures and having a subjective understanding.

With my own knowledge, I know that great apes other than humans, like chimpanzees and gorillas, have their own simple form of gesture communication where physical movements can emphasize whether they are feeling happy, upset, or any other emotions. Not to be confused with symbolic interactionism, this also could technically tie into the topic at hand because it might show that since evolution we have portrayed certain things with a connotation and this might have carried on into the society we currently have.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) 63-72: Pager, Would You Hire an Ex-Convict?

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) 63-72: Pager, Would You Hire an Ex-Convict?

# data[].attributes.body
This chapter mainly talks about incarceration and the prison system and how prison psychological effects do those who have been inside of it for the rest of their lives. I found it very surprising to learn about how there is a correlation between the amount of time someone has spent in prison and the employment rate. It is evident that the more time someone has been inside a prison, the less likely they are to get employed. It is also unfortunate to see that race also ties into this a little bit because people of African American descent are less likely to get employed than those of Caucasian descent.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 105 Coffee Shop Ethnography

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 105 Coffee Shop Ethnography

# data[].attributes.body
Strangers barely talk to each other. Maybe they might ask each other a question or two here and there like if someone is sitting on to see if they wanted to sit on our part from that strangers barely make any interactions with each other. The pace mostly feels pretty friendly, I mean everyone just minds their own business and only talks to each other when needed or when they're talking to the Starbucks employees when they're ordering their food, so I guess it's kind of a peaceful friendly environment. I don't feel like there's a moment where someone feels less welcome in the coffee shop than other people. It just never occurred to me like that, because I always thought everyone just came in here to grab some coffee or breakfast or maybe just sit in a peaceful quiet place to get some homework done.

However, when talking about what groups of people do the coffee shop specifically cater towards, it can be a little bit of an open-ended question. Most of the time, you're going to see teenagers and young adults in coffee shops because they are people in my opinion that are more likely to get high-energy quick meals, like coffee, pastries, tea, etc. It also could seem like people of a much older age are less likely to come into coffee shops because they might be more health-conscious so they'll avoid sugary Foods, maybe people of that age socialize or spend their time in different environments like libraries for example, or maybe the older generation just does not find appeal places like coffee shops. The thing that I think is least affected is race because honestly, I don't find any correlation between a person's race in a coffee shop and the reason they're there; anyone of any race can come to a coffee shop for any particular matter.

# data[].attributes.headline
(JCB) Chapter 10  Branding/The Self and Social Interaction

# data[].attributes.subject
(JCB) Chapter 10  Branding/The Self and Social Interaction

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) 135-146: Goffman, The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) 135-146: Goffman, The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) 249-264: Thompson, Handling the Stigma of Handling the Dead

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) 249-264: Thompson, Handling the Stigma of Handling the Dead

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) 269-276: Meyer, If Hitler Asked You…

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) 269-276: Meyer, If Hitler Asked You…

# data[].attributes.body
Philip Meyer’s piece, “If Hitler Asked You to Electrocute a Stranger, Would You?” He writes about a psychologist called Stanley Milgram who wanted to understand the truth to why Germans always followed Hitler even though he was a very terrible person. The experiment that he set up revealed much about society and how leaders always get people to follow them. He set up an experiment where everyone was an actor except for one subject of the test and that two of the actors would randomly be assigned a teacher or learner roll and giving a wrong answer would result in an electric shock. he found that the test subject was most likely to follow the leader or authority even if it resulted in getting a larger electric shock.

This honestly surprised me a little bit, resonated with me a little bit, but at the same time did not resonate with me that much. It surprised me in the sense that the test subject would more likely decide to stick with the decisions of the authority figure even if it meant getting a worse electric shock. I thought that people would have their own voice and opinions and would stick to whatever they want, but it seems like that's not the case here because the person is simply sticking with the decisions of the authority figure and getting an electric shock as a result. It resonated with me a little bit because I can understand why the person might have followed the authority figure most of the time. Maybe that person did not want to spend most of their energy trying to find fault with what is presented to them and just go with it. But at the same time, it did not resonate with me because I honestly in that situation would have stuck with my own decision and would have probably questioned the authority figure because that may just be my type of personality.

What this means for society is that we will see a lot of people simply being sheep to the dominant people in society. This is obviously bad because we need people in our society that can think for themselves and not simply follow the leader even if what they do could result in a negative consequence for the majority of people.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 140  Shopping for "we-ness"

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 140  Shopping for "we-ness"

# data[].attributes.body
As far back as I can remember, something that I wanted badly in sixth grade was a spare cell phone. This was because all of my peers in 6th grade already had a basic phone with working text messages so that they can communicate with people and access the internet. This wasn't something necessarily that I purchased, this was just more of something that I wanted my parents to give to me. This item did not necessarily convey membership within a group, but it was more of something that I really wanted to have because everyone already had it and it would seem important for me to get it as well. Although it kind of felt like it would give me membership, as not having a phone with making me look like a loser, that didn't necessarily bother me and wasn't a big deal.

For the most part, this did end up satisfy my desire for belonging. This was because I could keep in touch with the friends I made by adding them to my contact list, texting them for when we all plan to meet up and hang out, or just making calls to my parents when I have to. Other times it would be very convenient for me to have access to the internet at my fingertips because it would be really easy and convenient for me, and other times it would just be for a minor thing like playing games on my phone when I'm bored or whatever.

# data[].attributes.headline
(JCB) Chapter 3:  Fast Food/Work and Economy

# data[].attributes.subject
(JCB) Chapter 3:  Fast Food/Work and Economy

# data[].attributes.body
This chapter talks a lot about how major fast-food companies have control over major parts of the national food organization. The author made The statement. Just three companies control over 80% of the whole French fry Market in the world and that just four companies control over 80% of the beef packing in the United States. The author also coined the term “Mcdonaldization” which I thought was pretty funny to hear first but it made a lot of sense as I thought about it. the term was based on four key dimensions of McDonald's control over our society: efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control.

Personally, I believe that these giant food companies having gigantic control over the entire food industry can be a little bit bad. Just one or two major companies having control of a large area opens up the door to so much corruption and allows them to manipulate the markets in whichever way they want to. Even if someone makes the argument that not everyone eats fast food or eats the specific type of food that the companies distribute, a giant amount of Americans do eat fast food on a daily basis so these fast food companies still have all the power that they have.

I also think that these four key dimensions of McDonald's control over Society actually make a lot of sense. Efficiency wise, McDonald's just like every other major fast-food company wants to make selling their food as efficient as possible. This could also include doing whatever possible just so that they get the most bang for the buck. This could include reducing the quality of food, secretly reducing the amount of food over time, or whatever. Calculability could be defined as the measurement of everything in the production of the product. this means that McDonald's is trying to make every element of their production as quick and efficient as possible so they can roll out as much food and marketing as possible. Predictability I think is how predictable each product is across many of their fast-food chains so maybe it could be someone predicting the quality of a burger in one fast food joint versus another even though it's the same brand. And finally, control is McDonald's doing everything they can to control the workflow up their restaurants to optimize performance.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) 411-424: Ehrenreich, Nickeled and Dimed

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) 411-424: Ehrenreich, Nickeled and Dimed

# data[].attributes.body
In Down to Earth Sociology Chapter 6, the author, Barbara Ehrenreich, talks about her struggles about living at minimum wage. There was a point in the chapter where the author talked about how they got nearly a thousand dollars in 1 month and out of those thousand dollars they spent five hundred of it on food, gas, toiletries, laundry items, phone bills, and other utilities. They also made the point on how if trivial food items like oranges and milk went up in price it would not really affect the poor that much and they would just focus their spending on other things. But the most important thing that I think the author said here was how many people in the middle-class focus on luxuries like paid vacation and having credit cards and sick leaves when many people in the minimum wage don't really experience any of these things. This is really important to understand how privileged people of the middle class really are and how they don't really understand it.

In my opinion, the things that Ehrenreich discussed made a lot of sense. It makes me reflect on this issue a little bit more because being on minimum wage and being in poverty is something that most of us in the middle class don't really think about even though the shrinking middle class is very much a problem today. But I personally think the author could have made way better choices when spending the money, which is something else I think that people living in the minimum wage should heavily show consideration on because that is one of the reasons why they're there in the first place. I felt like the author could have easily cut down on money for the laundry if they just wore their clothes economically instead of wearing as much as possible and they possibly could have cut down money for the food if they were doing less intensive activities throughout the day, making them more hungry and them making purchase more food.

This reflects on society because poverty is a big issue that affects a decent chunk of the population. Many of them go into poverty because of bad habits, losing their job, or lack of education and many of them stay in poverty because payday loan companies trap them into purchasing more loans, they don't know how to spend their money economically, or they don't know how to earn money fast enough. I feel like if more people have proper education on where to spend their money and how to conserve as much of it as possible then we will see a decent decline in the amount of the population that is in this type of poverty.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) 497-507: Leidner, Over the Counter at McDonald's

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) 497-507: Leidner, Over the Counter at McDonald's

# data[].attributes.body
This piece of text talks all about what rationalization is and how not just McDonald's, but nearly every fast food restaurant has some form of rationalization to make operations much quicker and easier. To rationalize something is to make it much more understandable and efficient. We can see this in many fast-food restaurants. Even though McDonald's has nearly 35,000 restaurants worldwide, nearly all of them have the exact same user experience, with nearly the same menu items, same interior decoration, same employee outfits, etc. This really helps boost their productivity because They can focus Less on how each restaurant will look and how the menu will be and they can focus more on the employee's performance to the customers.

I understand why many restaurants would do things like this. Like I mentioned earlier, it significantly boosts their performance as they can spend less energy and time on the restaurant that sells and more on counting up all the money that they've accumulated from all their businesses. However, I have a doubt about this because, in some countries around the world, the exact same restaurant brand can have different menu items. For example, when I went to India, there was an item on the menu called the “Maharaja Mac” which was a little bit different than the standard Big Mac in the United States. Even though this is one example of a menu item, I could infer that restaurant businesses around the world don't have the exact same user experience in every restaurant chain that they open up, but instead a similar experience throughout all the restaurant chains that correlate to the location where the business is in. Building off of what I stated earlier, there wasn't a single menu option with beef in it in the restaurant by 1/2 in India but in the United States beef is the standard option when it comes to Burgers in McDonald's. This is because cows are considered holy in India so putting beef on the menu would not benefit the business. So in conclusion, I believe that this idea that restaurants have a very similar user experience, very similar indoor decoration, and very similar menu items all combine to make a very rationalized and easy experience but at the same time, I believe that restaurants should I have minor but important differences around the world or depending on the location where they open up.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) 535-546: Wishard, Caught Between the Ages

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) 535-546: Wishard, Caught Between the Ages

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter 46 is called “Caught Between the Ages” and it is written by William Van Deusen Wishards. This chapter is all about how modern society has been affected by many different factors, including terrorism which is a huge global conflict. They make the point how one single event, like 911, could psychologically damage so many people around the world to the point where this tragic memory is engraved in the minds of everyone. They also state that this generation is way too dependent on technology rather than their own knowledge and if something were to happen that would render technology useless we all would not survive well because of our dependence on it.

I kind of understand where the author is coming from when writing this. This generation is much much different than the generations that have come before and we are in a very unique position. Technology circles our entire lives and I won't deny that sometimes it has been hard to live without some engagement. I believe this is so because technology and the internet provide a very high amount of stimulation and this keeps young and growing minds hooked on and active. The moment that stimulation stops it's a little bit hard to look back and appreciate things with less stimulation. Also, we are living in a generation that seems to be a little bit more sensitive than the previous generations so suppose another tragic event like 9/11 to happen again, this generation would not take it as well as the generations that have come before us.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 79 Corporate Ideologies

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 79 Corporate Ideologies

# data[].attributes.body
The corporate brand that I chose is Microsoft because I feel like they are one of the most influential companies in modern-day society. The entire world practically revolves around the PC, which is any computer with the Windows operating system in it. Ever since Microsoft launched this platform, the entire computing world, as well as modern-day society, would take a huge turn on this innovation in computing. Microsoft might serve as a cultural pedagogue because it shows the sheer scale at which major companies have control over major parts of the world, like the population. What I mean by this is that when Microsoft makes a major update to Windows OS, it affects hundreds of millions of people and if the update is bad, it could cause a lot of trouble for that much amount of people. If the update had a major security flaw, hundreds upon millions of PCs could easily be infected and this would be very bad on a global scale.

This can cause many people to be wary about how much control Microsoft has over their own operating system and make wise choices. it can also teach people about consumption habits because many high-end Windows computers can cost thousands of dollars and this makes people very worried about what they're spending it on. People that want to build their own Windows PCs will also be very worried about the parts that thereby and will offer more economical choices. Some of these ideas have come to hegemony like the one about not spending that much money on expensive computers but some of them are still yet to come to hegemony like how much control a company has over the personal computers of a population of people.

# data[].attributes.body
Personally, I believe that anyone working at a minimum wage right now deserves to have an increase in the amount of money that they received. I think that the fast-food campaign demands for a 15-hour minimum wage are fine because these people living on minimum wage need all the money they can and tipping them a little bit more per hour does not seem like a bad idea whatsoever. Especially considering that these fast food restaurants are worth millions upon billions of dollars, this not only won't affect them that much but will make the livelihood of their workers much better. Then do someone might argue that this may cause the price of food to increase so fewer people will be incentivized to buy the food, I feel like the pros outweigh the cons in this case.

Similarly, I believe that unionizing this would be a great idea so that more people can get the awareness of this and this benefit would reach more fast-food workers. Something that might encourage the unionization of fast-food workers is the fact that many fast-food workers will have an increase in pay. This is important to consider because many fast-food workers are currently living under minimum wage. However, something that I feel like might discourage the unionization of fast-food workers in other companies or businesses recognizing them for their protest for equal pay in a sense.