# data[].attributes.body
As I log into this semester, COMS 371 is the class I find myself most excited for about any  since social psychology (which also has connections to COMS through the interpretation of psychology as a group phenomena). 2 years ago when I initially applied for Universities, I applied to Concordia's Communications program and got rejected after submitting a god-awful essay about post-modernism through the personification of corporate social media accounts. Since that point communications has been more of a hobby than an interest of study.

However, over this past summer I've transferred from McGill to the University of Calgary and had a much easier time entering into communications courses. After taking Visual Communications (COMS 367) this summer, I realized I've had a certain amount of untapped passion for media studies that's been in search of a formal and academic space to grow. To answer the question posed for this entry, what I'm most excited for is to put a name to certain phenomena through media I've struggled to articulate up to this point. As an example, I've attached a commercial that my dad and I have been ruminating on lately. It's an advertisement for RBC with professional golfer Dustin Johnson. The reason I've chosen this specific example is because I don't know how to describe the response it elicits within me. I feel mentally repulsed by the ad, and I can't place why. I have small theories, but I thought it would be a fun activity to return to the commercial at the end of my journal with the wealth of knowledge (finger crossed) at my disposal and pinpoint exactly what is driving me crazy about a banking advertisement. I'm very excited to learn many topics, specifically Marxist theory, and eventually apply them to RBC's animatronic golfer.

# data[].attributes.body
In her argument, Engstrom paints The Knot and its vast media network as a perpetrator of normative femininity reinforced through both consumerism and the objectification of the female physical form (Engstrom, 2008). Through dissecting its website-based consumerism, television programming, and advertising messaging, Engstrom draws attention to the intense cultural stresses of simultaneous faux-empowerment through agency in wedding planning, as well as the pressure to conform to a certain gaze of femininity (Engstrom, 2008). Such stressors turn what is to be an organic, fulfilling moment into one dominated by consumerism and excess spending (Engstrom, 2008). The political economy that informs her perspective serves to illuminate the strange hegemony of a "white wedding" marriage.

Engaging with both the Marxist theory in the textbook as well as Engstrom's dissection of the wedding-industrial complex left a sour taste in my mouth. Like all theory, Marxism provides a lens through which we can observe the world. I went to work later in the evening for my night-shift shipment work at the GAP, and found myself staring at the advertisements that litter the walls. Specifically, one advertisement that promotes GAP's new line of environmentally conscious children's clothes, which don slogans like "I Can Make A Difference". Immediately I began asking myself questions; what is the trade-off between environmental messaging and the damage done to said-environment to mass produce the clothes? What is the significance of the shirts slogan exploring the singular subject "I" as an individual? What role was I playing as a worker in this situation, complicit in exploiting the environment (while "saving" it) as well as being simultaneous exploited through the mechanical nature of my labour? My main takeaway from this weeks reading is to be critical of consumerism that presents itself as some form of agency. When viewed through the lens of Marx's false consciousness, we see the systems of exploitation and oppression clearly, and our perceived choices can be thrown into doubt.

# data[].attributes.body
An example of revolutionary imagery being absorbed into hegemony.

# data[].attributes.headline
Neo-facism as a product of sensationalist media

# data[].attributes.subject
Neo-facism as a product of sensationalist media

# data[].attributes.body
Since it was published in December 9th of 2016, Ross's article has aged like a fine wine. Over the last four years of the Trump presidency, America's social climate has seen an rise in right-wing ideology (Ross, 2016). Ross predicted such a rise by relating Trump's meteoric rise to the ideas of the Frankfurt School regarding mass culture (Ross, 2016). According to Horkheimer and Adorno, mass culture is a consumed passively, distractive, and legitimizes power (Horkheimer & Adorno, 2002). Trump, as a pop-culture item, was adopted by mass culture as an artifact of fascination. He received most of the medias attention during both the Republican primary and the general election (Ross, 2016). Ross see's Trumps election (and the rise of neo-facism) as a product of how the culture industry sensationalizes politics for profit (Ross, 2016).

The quote about Hillary Clinton gets directly at the point of Ross's article. The "darkest cloud of boredom" that hung over Clinton's campaign refers to her inability to take advantage of the same cyclical pop-culture appeal that Trump did (Ross, 2016). While Trump used mass culture to his advantage, Clinton's campaign looked to play within the rules of a standard election. Simply put, the two candidates were playing different sports on the same field. Clinton staked her claim to being the responsible counterpoint to the absurdity of the Trump campaign. In doing so, she made herself widely unappealing to the culture industry (Ross, 2016). Unfortunately, due to the role of mass culture as described by Horkheimer and Adorno, mass American culture isn't very interested in hearing about tax cuts and  centrist policies. The consumers are passive absorbers of entertainment and taught not to think critically about what they see (Horkheimer & Adorno, 2002). In being a more stereotypical politician, Clinton failed to defeat Trump during the battle of cultural relevance. Ultimately, she lost the war.

# data[].attributes.body
Clinton failed to tap into the potential of the culture industry, but not without attempts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Clinton drops a Pokemon Go reference at rally

# data[].attributes.body
Political activism seems to have taken a new form in the digital age, and K-Pop are a unique group in the way that their community mobilizes in such a directed and synchronized manner (Kelly, 2020). In Kelly's article, their activism takes the forms of jamming report lines, organizing instantaneously to raise funds for charity, and radicalizing members of internet communities (Kelly, 2020). The network of stans from across the globe seems to be strong and ideologically unified (Kelly, 2020). They perfectly exemplify the belief of active audiences from cultural studies, specifically the Birmingham School. In opposition to the Horkheimer and Adorno, Stuart Hall and his contemporaries saw audiences as decoders of meaning from the media they consume (Hall, 1980). They are active political agents (Hall, 1980). Specifically with K-Pop stans, they have displayed traits of both negotiated and oppositional decoding in how they interpret media. This is demonstrated by their response in support of the Black Lives Matter protests, denying the Dallas Police Department's attempts to set up a report hotline (Kelly, 2020).

Another example of fan activism, also within the Black Lives Matter protest, is the appropriation of Kendrick Lamar's song "Alright" as a protest anthem. The song (and the album as a whole) is about the modern structural impediments facing African-Americans. "Alright" preaches positivity and optimism in the face of violent racism. It's use started naturally in the BLM protests in Ferguson, Missouri following the shooting of Michael Brown, who was shot unarmed by a police officer. Protestors demonstrated the ability to engage with the song as a source of power and repurpose it in opposition to their suppressors. This demonstrated their ability to be an active audience in their interpretation and appropriation of the song.

# data[].attributes.body
Protestors singing the refrain from Kendrick Lamar's "Alright".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Police harassment leads to crowd singing Kendrick Lamar's "Alright"

# data[].attributes.body
independent folk artist?

# data[].attributes.body
Through Saussure's development of structuralism and its further advancement by Barthes, semiotics provides a new basis on which we can interrogate media. In the spirit of Barthes, I choose to analyze a piece of popular culture that, at first glance, seems devoid of ideology (Hall et al, 1997). What better place to is there to look than the Billboard Hot 100? On July 24, 2020, Taylor Swift released her eight studio album titled "Folklore". The album represents a sonic shift for the internationally acclaimed pop-star, with the project reflecting a more sombre version of the artist than her audience has become accustomed to. Now in October, the album still sits at #7 on the charts. Using both Barthes and Saussure's methods we can look at the album cover to identify the signifier and signified, along with the subsequent denotation and connotations.

The signifier of "Folklore", or form of the sign, is its status as an album cover. The album cover is both functional in marketing the album, as well as an extension of artistic expression from the artist. The signified, or descriptives of the form, are abundant in this case (Hall et al, 1997). We can point to the black and white de-colouration, the young women (Taylor Swift) standing alone, the foliage and forestry surrounding her, her baggy outdoor wear, and the haziness of the atmosphere surrounding her. One could go on all day pointing to the various elements. But what do they mean? How does meaning exist within the album cover?

From here we move into semiotics. From the totality of our sign, we can create a denotation like "Taylor swift stands alone amongst a hazy forest atmosphere looking into the distance longingly" (Hall et al, 1997). Then, we can built a connotation. Immediately, I am compelled to return to the context of the sign. Taylor Swift's identity as a multimillionaire and pop-culture icon seems at odds with the image. Taylor may be aiming to present herself as down to earth, naturalistic, and removed from stardom. To me, this creates a great deal of cognitive dissonance. Thanks to her wealth and status, Taylor Swift would have had every conceivable resource at her disposal during the creation of the album, all the way from production to promotion. There seems to be a great deal of irony in a popular consumer product from one of the worlds biggest stars being portrayed as folky. The connotation I see is that the the aesthetics of folk and independent artistry are being assimilated into a mass-consumer product under the pretences of authenticity. Therefore, the meaning imparted is that this image contributes to the inauthentic representation of artistry in the mass-consumption of popular music.

# data[].attributes.headline
Michel Foucault is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting

# data[].attributes.subject
Michel Foucault is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting

# data[].attributes.body
Topic: Toast
Password: grade2rocks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'We're toast': Teacher drops off zoom call and 2nd graders hilariously try to behave

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When a 2nd grade teacher at Parkland Elementary in Texas lost internet and left of her virtual classroom, her students realized the conversation was being recorded and won't stop talking about toast.

# data[].attributes.body
Foucault's concept of governmentality is the process through which individuals shape their own conduct beyond the institutions of government (Hall et al, 1997). Oulette and Hay's article assess reality television's functional role in governmentality (through Foucauldian tradition) within the context of American neoliberal ethics (Oulette & Hall, 2008). Their contention is that programs like The Biggest Loser serve to further our personal internalization of agency through issues like public hygiene (Oulette & Hall, 2008). These shows serve to increase governmentality in their viewership by promoting behaviour self-regulatory behaviours for which they are ultimately responsible (Oulette & Hall, 2008). While they have the freedom not to care for themselves, the are also burdened by the responsibility (Oulette & Hall, 2008).

This week while scrolling Twitter, I came across a prime example of Foucault's interpretation of the panopticon. A class of grade two students in Texas were, as much of the world is, engaging in a zoom classroom. Their teacher had some connection issues and left the chat. One would think chaos would set in, but a couple of students were quick to point out that they were being recorded, thus they should all be on their best behaviour as to not get in "big trouble" from the teacher or principal. The video serves as both cute entertainment and a perfect example of how engrained the concepts of governmentality are. While the example is simplistic, I chose it due to the age of the students. The kids understand the implications of an unseen authoritative presence, much like the prisoners understand the prison guard at the centre of Bentham's panopticon (Hall et al, 1997). They then displayed the exact type of behaviour predicted by Foucault, self-regulating their behaviour (Hall et al, 1997). As for the last question posed in this entry, self-regulatory practices on social media serve as a pertinent and modern example of governmentality. The knowledge that each of us carries online, that we our behaviours are being perceived by others, serves as a powerful motivator that guides online behaviour. It can lead to the online identities that portray perfectionism, encapsulate hegemonic ideals, influence our aesthetic choices, serve as a platform for political engagement, help us reach out to others in times of need, and many more. In all examples, our actions are influenced by the fact we are seen. We all, whether consciously or unconsciously, judge ourselves as if we were the guard in the centre of the panopticon.

# data[].attributes.body
Eric Andre comedically illuminates the complicated nature of popular feminism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Do you think Margaret Thatcher had Girl Power?

# data[].attributes.body
Feminism is at an interesting crossroads as a social and cultural political movement. As Prof. Keller explained in this weeks lectures, the current zeitgeist has seen both the rise of postfeminist thought (through "mens rights" activists and popular misogyny) as well as feminism becoming somewhat hegemonic in media spaces/celebrity culture (Keller, 2020). Both these examples call the role of contemporary feminism into question. When looking at both modern iterations of feminism, I feel varying degrees of skepticism. While postfeminism offers today's society as evidence of success, popular feminism arguably offers representation as its most titular component. Misogyny is clearly a direct threat to feminist movements, but popular feminism may also hold a more cloaked form of oppression. Representation, while crucially important in both race and gender theory as explained by Stuart Hall, should serve as a means rather than an end. Much like the goal of anti-racism isn't to elect a black President then call it a day, feminisms' directive shouldn't be limited to women holding positions of political, social and cultural power. It should be to challenge the structures that continue to oppressed those  targeted by oppression and outline by intersectional feminism like race, age, ability, nationality (Keller, 2020).

For this weeks artifact, a clip from the Eric Andre show immediately sprung to mind. Eric is interviewing Spice Girl Mel B and asks her if Margaret Thatcher, the former PM of the UK, has "girl power". Mel gives an emphatic yes, to which Eric switches tone to ask if she effectively utilized said "girl power" by funding violence in Northern Ireland. While the clip is both comedic and fatally contentious, it points to the same critique I've raised about popular feminism. In becoming somewhat hegemonic popular feminism can be too applied broadly, in this case validating genocide. Mel B herself can be considered a representative symbol of feminist ideals in the Spice Girls (claiming her sexuality as a powerful women of colour), and still gets baited into this "gotcha" moment. Popular feminisms' focus on representation, while constructive and empowering for girls/women globally, can also be oppressive to that same audience. In Thatcher's case, the positive aspect of representation comes with adopting the negative conservative and militaristic policies that oppress those that intersectional feminism claims to protect. The goal shouldn't be to have women represented (full stop), the goal should be for women that encompass the political goals of intersectional feminism represented in constructive positions of power to challenge structural inequality.

# data[].attributes.headline
The negotiated history of transgender representation

# data[].attributes.subject
The negotiated history of transgender representation

# data[].attributes.body
Upon finishing this week's viewing of Netflix's 'Disclosure', I took a second to reflect on what transgender representations I was familiar with. In my personal life, my best friends girlfriend had a friend, Sam (a transgender girl) who I had met once. There was also a girl who sat in my intro to psychology class who asked a lot of gender-specific questions during the attraction unit who I later came to know was transgender. After considering those examples on the periphery of my mesosphere, my next thoughts were unfortunately of Buffalo Bill and Norman Bates. Both aren't exactly glowing examples of transgender representation. Above all, this documentary forced me to reconcile with the implicit attitudes I held of transgender people based off of the media I'd consumed. The documentary leaves the viewers with the stat that 80% of Americans don't know someone personally who is transgender (Feder, 2020). And if I, part of the 20% who know a transgender person, still must step back and challenge my assumptions, it makes it abundantly clear that trans representation still has a ways to go. Contemporary representation may be improving, but there is still a lot of work required to reverse the harmful perceptions of  transgender people in pop-culture.

An interesting topic that ties into the COMS 201 curriculum was the discourse surrounding feminist critiques of transgender people. The contention of some is that in assuming a feminine identity, they adopt overly sexualized attitudes of womanhood that present themselves in their physical appearance such  accentuating features like the lips and eyebrows with make-up, wearing provocative outfits, and overall emphasizing their figure.  Transgender people in the documentary respond to these critiques with third-wave feminist arguments about reclaiming beauty, sexuality, and femininity (Feder, 2020). They are therefore empowered by the emphasis on their identity as women, not oppressed by it. As well, transgender people are representations of intersectional feminism, which purports to serve the interests of those most oppressed by society based on gender, race, ability, and more (Feder, 2020). Transgender women of colour, which the documentary focusses heavily on, couldn't be a better example of intersectionality.

Lastly, what compelled me most about the documentary was the nuanced interpretations of many of the texts analyzed by its transgender hosts. While movies like 'Boys Don't Cry' may include positive representations of transgender relationships and people at large, they also raise concerns about the actors who play these roles. A point was also made about the sensationalist transgender nightmare that occurs in the climax of the movie, where the main characters girlfriend is forced to look at his "lack of a penis" (Feder, 2020). This degrades transgender people by focussing on their former identity, and may be traumatic for some viewers (Feder, 2020). I appreciate the maturity of the critique displayed in the documentary, and the way it carefully considered the multitude of factors at play throughout the complex history of transgender representation.

# data[].attributes.body
"Eating the Other" is a seminal work by  scholar, feminist and social activist bell hooks. In her writing, she lays the theoretical groundwork for our modern understanding of cultural appropriation and the different forms it takes (hooks, 1992). Cultural appropriation, the act of adopting specific elements of minority culture into the majority (read 'white') through commodification, is described as a fantasy of "otherness" (hooks, 1992). It is the through this assimilation of culture that minority cultures are diluted to further reinforce the power of those with privilege (hooks, 1992). Furthermore, the adoption of the culture into the majority further alienates the minority groups it pulls from. It serves to reinforce them as the "other";  wild, exotic, and nothing more than a spectacle (hooks, 1992). Their history and traditions are turned into object's of desire to enhance the dreary, culture-less white existence (hooks, 1992). Therefore, what it means to "eat the other" is to simultaneously assimilate and alienate culture for the sake of entertainment. In doing so, power structures and the status quo are reinforced, subjugating minorities groups to further oppression (hooks, 1992).

The most personally impactful section of hook's writing was on page 23 where she discusses eavesdropping on a group of white men discussing their predatory behaviour in courting women of colour. To quote, "fucking was a way to confront the Other, to leave behind white 'Innocence' and enter a world of 'experience'" (hooks, 1992). Sex becomes an act of domination of the Other, an exotic experience, and disgustingly impersonal (hooks, 1992). This pathetic need for excitement harkens to imperialist ideologies of exoticism and thrill-seeking (hooks, 1992). The example shows how entrenched these attitudes are in those who may consider themselves progressive. The implicit degradation of humanity speaks to the lack of education that exists, even on a university campus (usually a symbol for progressive attitudes). The worst part of these attitudes is that they still exist today in such a brazen way. Personally, I heard many discussions that echo the sentiment of hook's example while in a student residence at McGill. Even in such a progressive environment, these discussions are rampant within groups of heterosexual white males  trying to flex their bravado. As a member of said community, we have a long ways to go. Moving forward, I hope to hold myself accountable and lead by some sort of example.

# data[].attributes.body
The implication I took from this weeks readings was the nature of online organization to acts like a double edged sword for progressives. Structurally, platforms like Twitter and Facebook provide an accessible space for people to produce a discourse (i.e., Black Lives Matter on Facebook in 2015) (Jackson, 2020). The flip side of this is the fragmented constructive of algorithms, along with their lack of incentive to change them, leads to the platforms created built-in ideologies based on user activity/attention (Noble, 2012). In the last two years, the rise of right-wing rhetoric on Facebook has grown. While Facebook claims to detest any form of hate-speech, they have no monetary incentive to change the structures that promote said speech. These posts garner attention that Facebook can use to sell to advertisers, so going against their most popular content would be a poor business plan. Thus, the double-edged structural sword. This begs the question: do the benefits of accessible organization outweigh the reactionary nature of the algorithms?

Structure aside, creating public discourse on social media offers other problems. Metaphorically, they function as a town hall with millions of attendee's. Thus, they carry a baked-in neoliberal free-market ideology  that the best ideas will naturally rise to the top. As with any marketplace, this means the masses may be susceptible to trends and ideas that aren't centralized to any movement. It is without question that movements like Black Lives Matter have been the target of misinformation, accusations, and  misrepresentation of their goals. While Twitter has recently displayed the intent to crack down of fact-checking through it's regulation of Trump's tweets regarding voter fraud, it seems this is only the tip of the iceberg.

If we are to continue the town hall metaphor, we need to call into question the amount of progressive action that can be accomplished on a public platform. While Black Lives Matter has been successful in reaching out to new audiences through coverage of protests and the exposing the acts of violence against unarmed black people (Jackson, 2020), there needs to be a space for these conversations to flourish uninhibited. Imagine holding a town hall on progressive strategy for defunding the police, but with an organized mass of MAGA protestors intruding. You have to confront the treat in front of you, rather than focus on development tactics. While this point is far more abstract than those raised in the readings, it again points to the problem of organizing in the marketplace of ideas. Protestors in Hong Kong have had a lot of successful organizing through private platforms like WeChat, where everyone is more or less on the same page and protected from outside sources. For North American political movements to evolve, a similar level of strategy will need to be enacted.

# data[].attributes.body
Looking back on this semester in COMS 371, I feel a strong sense of accomplishment in the learning. In my first entry, I talked about the excitement I felt about the prospect of having specifics theories to apply to the feeling I had in response to media. In this sense, my goals have been accomplished. Removed from any papers, tests or journal entries, I take the most from the knowledge I now feel some sense of practical mastery over due to this class. From political economy to poststructuralism, from the culture industry to critical race theory, I feel a lot of pride in the accumulation of perspectives I can now wield in my interactions with media and culture at large. However, if pressed to select the one topic that I felt the most kinship too, it would probably Foucault's conception of regime's of truth. I found his ideas of the production of knowledge compelling as it presented a dispersed, not top-down (Marxist) approach. This inspired a lot of hope in me, and I regularly return to the concepts when I feel somewhat existential about the lack of progressive change in the world. The idea that truth can grow organically and decentralized feels uplifting, and the Internet provides the perfect tool for such production.

The largest theme I took from the class is the ability for critique to be presented alongside praise. People love to saying "we're more polarized than ever", and I feel my eyes rolling even as I type the words. But in terms of criticism, now I feel the ability feel both hope and accountability in many aspects of my life, the ability to sit in an ideological grey area. The perfect example is the Joe Biden presidency, with much left-wing discourse being proposed on the potential long-term benefits of another 4 years of Trump to inspire further activism and accountability. However, I'd be lying if I didn't feel some sort of relief watching Joe run out like a WWE wrestler at his acceptance speech (link provided). Politically, I oppose most everything Biden has done as a senator and vice-president. I am of the belief that his track record speaks for itself, and he won't become some magical progressive father-figure when he steps foot in the oval office. This is where my new perspective comes in. Instead of feeling down about it, I now feel somewhat inspired to be the voice of left politics in opposition. I feel relief and opposition towards a Biden presidency, and crucially, no cognitive dissonance in doing so. Thanks COMS 371! I'm thankful to have taken this class during what feels like a significant social and political movement, though I have a sneaking suspicion that ever moment will feel that way as long as I'm still active on Twitter.

In my first entry in this journal, I brought up an RBC advertisement I'd seen recently. It starred Dustin Johnson, hitting a drive in a very futuristic looking environment. I vowed to return to the ad with all my fancy new knowledge and theories at the end of the course and dissect what exactly it was that made me so uneasy about watching it. I feel somewhat unaccomplished in this aspect, as I don't feel like any of the theories apply specifically to what I'm talking about. I suppose there might be something to be said for a political economy approach targeted at RBC, or some strange representation study on Dustin Johnson as the face of banking. Johnson's cyborg looking avatar certainly exists in the uncanny valley, but that doesn't fully encapsulate what repulses me about the ad. Any theoretical attempt, in my opinion, would be over-intellectualizing the interpretation I had. More than anything, I think it just boils down to a dumb ad that thinks it's more important than it is. Theory is incredible illuminating and important, but I do believe it's nice just to be able to just sit back and feel. Sometimes I suppose bad ad it just bad ad.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Joe Biden running out to Bret "Hitman" Hart theme

# data[].attributes.body
Engstrom, E. (2008). Unravelling The Knot. Sage Publications, 32(1), 60-82.

Feder, S. (Director). (2020). Disclosure: Trans Lives On Screen [Film]. Field of Vision.

Hall, S. (1980) ‘Encoding/Decoding’. Culture, Media, Language: Working papers in cultural studies, 1972–9, Hall, S., Hobson, D., Lowe, A. and Willis, P. (eds), London: Hutchinson, 128–38.

Hall, S., Nixon, J., & Nixon, S. (1997). The Work of Representation. Sage Publishing, 2, 20-36.

hooks, b. (1992). Black Looks: Race and Representation. South End Press, 21-39.

Horkheimer, M. & Adorno, T.W. (2002). Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical frag- ments, translated by Jephcott, E., Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. Excerpt from Chapter 4, 94–8.

Jackson, S. (2020). #HashtagActivism: Networks of Race and Gender Justice. MIT Press, 124-152.

Keller, J. (2020). Week 8: Video 1 of 3. Retrieved from University of Calgary COMS 371 on D2L.

Kelly, E. (2020). More Than Stans: Stop Dismissing the K-Pop Fandom's Political Power. bitchmedia. https://www.bitchmedia.org/article/k-pop-fandom-political-force

Noble, S. (2012). Missed Connections: What Search Engines Say About Women. Bitchmedia, 54, 36-41.

Ouellette, L., & Hay, J. (2008). Makeover television, governmentality and the good citizen. Continuum, 22(4), 471-484

Ross, A. (2016). The Frankfurt School Knew Trump Was Coming. New York Times. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-frankfurt-school-knew-trump-was-coming