# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
A screenshot from the video where Ethan & Hila Klein announced that they had won the lawsuit filed against them.

# data[].attributes.body
As a part of a generation that was raised on the internet, I have been familiar with the concept of fair use for most of my life. It has been a constant question, especially among content made on YouTube, of what counts as fair use? And after reading the text, I think have a more practical definition of fair use. That definition is, Fair Use is a doctrine that lets someone show copyrighted material freely in order to criticize or comment on the material.
One example I have is one that was massive in the YouTube space. Two youtubers named Ethan & Hila Klein made a commentary video criticizing the actions of another YouTube content creator who was making vaguely sexist videos. This other YouTuber responded by suing the Kleins and this case ended up going to trial and ruled in the favor of the Kleins. This was a landmark case for YouTube creators because it reassured what Fair Use is and set a precedent for it legally.
The other example that I have is not just one example. There is a former competitive video game player named Billy Mitchell who had cheated on a world record that he had set. A multitude of people made videos online commenting on this using copyrighted video from the event where the record was supposedly set as evidence. Mitchell filed a number of lawsuits against many people for using this footage, but they have been struck down as they are seen as Fair Use.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
An image of the current ongoing SAG-AFTRA strike.

# data[].attributes.body
While looking through this week's current articles, one of the articles covering media ethics really popped out at me. This article being, The Bruce Willis Deepfake is Everyone's Problem, published on WIRED, and written by Will Bedingfield. This article covers the idea of deepfake's effects on the film and tv industry and has ended up being extremely topical due to the Screen Actor's Guild going on strike in order to stop AI and deepfakes from infecting their careers.
The article speaks of only one incident, where Bruce Willis' likeness was used without permission in an advertisement through a deepfake (which is already misappropriation due to Willis not agreeing to promote this product). The article continues on describing that the concept of deepfakes and the right to your likeness will likely have a larger effect on the industry moving forward and we are already seeing its effects.
Recently it has been uncovered that larger movie studios are attempting to get lesser known actor's likenesses in order to have them act as extras for eternity. They plan to have an actor come in, get a facial scan for the AI to use to replicate later, have the actor sign away their likeness in perpetuity, and then pay them a day rate for it. This is extremely troubling for the industry and I think that this article nailed it on the head with its prediction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
A photo of Ajit Pai, the former chairman of the FCC, who was a figurehead for the repealing of Net Neutrality laws in 2017.

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter 14 reminded me of a concept that had fallen to the back of my mind for many, many years, that being Net Neutrality. There was a massive push in 2017 done by Donald Trump and his many allies in order to overturn net neutrality laws that were passed by Obama during his administration.
The concept behind net neutrality is extremely important in this era, where the internet is being used more and more both from a business perspective and from a personal one. From the business side of things, it protects internet providers from up charging various websites and programs that use the internet in order to get faster internet speeds. And from a consumer point of view, it protects that cost that is being up charged from being passed onto the consumers and keeps the price of things like streaming services from rising to drastically.
However, due to the push from 2017, there is no federal net neutrality law and the country is sort of in free fall right now. California seems decently protected, since it has passed laws to protect internet users and even when the Trump administration sued the state, the case ended up getting dropped. While I don't know what the future holds regarding net neutrality, we can all be optimistic.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the reasons that I loved reading chapter 15 is due to all of the different proposed models for how to go about ethical media. While I don't necessarily agree with all of them it was extremely interesting to read about different perspectives on this, and perhaps the most interesting of these concepts was John Stuart Mill's Principle of Utility.
To summarize the concept, Mill basically proposes that whatever action will cause the least amount of harm to the least amount of people should be done. But it gets complicated with how it seems dismissive of the remaining harm caused. Mill's methodology here, while seemingly the option that works the best for the greater good, doesn't seem to have much empathy for the few that are still caused pain and hurt by whatever is released. I do think that The Principle of Utility is one of the better options for an ethical window to view media through but I think understanding its downside is needed in order to properly use that ethical window.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
A New York Journal article sensationalizing the events that led to the Spanish American War

# data[].attributes.body
Perhaps the most interesting concept to me that was talked about in Chapter 5 was that of Yellow Journalism. I had heard of the term in the past but was not that aware of its meaning. And after reading about the actions of Joseph Pulitzer, William Randolph Hearst, and of actions of modern figures, I believe I have a good definition. Yellow Journalism is news that is specifically sensationalized for the purpose of making more money.
One of the most infamous examples of Yellow Journalism came from Pulitzer and Hearst, when it came to the lead up to the Spanish American War in 1898. Both Pulitzer and Hearst were stoking fears of potential war over Cuba in increasingly drastic and intriguing ways in order to sell more papers over the other. This led to panic among the public and led to fears being stoked enough that the US went to war with Spain.
Another example of Yellow Journalism is Fox News stoking the fears of right wing Americans to the point where they stormed the capital on January 6th. Fox News kept broadcasting anti-democratic rhetoric and saying that the election was rigged, which is clearly untrue, but they used this rhetoric in order to get more views from their target demographic. This sort of rhetoric led to the radicalization of the American public, and the storming of the capital building on January 6th, 2021.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
A picture of Howard Stern, the example of a shock jock in the textbook.

# data[].attributes.body
One concept that was mentioned in chapter 6 that I was vaguely familiar with was that of a shock jock. The text describes several different factors that make a shock jock and gives an example, being Howard Stern. My definition of shock jock is as follows, a shock jock is a radio or podcast host who uses crude and often offensive remarks to gain popularity.
One example of a shock jock is Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh was a conservative radio show host from the mid 1980's until his death in 2021. He often used exaggerated talking points from the far-right in order to retain his audience of conservatives. He compared a 13 year old Chelsea Clinton to a dog, he insinuated oil spills were being caused by left leaning terrorists, and he said that COVID-19 was just a common cold. He was a textbook example of a shock jock.
Another example is a commentator that I have previously mentioned in a discussion post, Matt Walsh. He hosts a podcast on the conservative media platform, The Daily Wire. On it, he says offensive things such as calling gay people "depraved and corrupt", implied women shouldn't be allowed in the army, and has heavily implied multiple times that the US should lower the age of consent. Walsh says absolutely terrible things in order for people to pay attention to him.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
An interesting chart showing the percentage of households with multiple streaming services from the additional linked article.

# data[].attributes.headline
Current Article: Predictions for Streaming Services.

# data[].attributes.subject
Current Article: Predictions for Streaming Services.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the articles that caught my eye the most out of this week's was one under the movie articles, 5 Bold Predictions for Streaming Services in 2022 by Ben Bowman. In this post, I'll be going through the predictions one by one and giving my opinion on them.
The first prediction is that Paramount+ will sizably grow in 2022. While it does give some apt thoughts on Paramount+, like them perfecting the simultaneous release method for movies, and a growing catalog of blockbuster movies like Top Gun: Maverick. I do not believe that it has grown exponentially. According to an article linked here, while Paramount+ did grow by about 14 million users, streaming services like Max and Disney+ grew more last year. But still, proportionally, it had a 40% increase compared to Max and Disney+'s 28% and 39% respectively.
The next prediction is that Disney+ would stall domestically, which according to the same linked source, is untrue. It has kept its steady rise going throughout 2022. The third and fourth predictions are that Peacock and CNN+ will go nowhere. These predictions are ones that I believe have come true, with the article that I found not finding either Peacock or CNN+ noteworthy enough to mention. Additionally, CNN+ did fully shut down last year, which makes their crash and burn prediction true. The final prediction is that Youtube TV will offer different channel packages similarly to Sling TV. This is decidedly untrue, with Youtube TV still offering one singular base package with a few additional add-ons.

# data[].attributes.body
I liked think of myself as decently educated in the history of Hollywood and the movie industry as a whole. I knew of The Paramount Decrees and of the invention of Talkies. I knew of the troubling production of The Wizard of Oz and of the musicals that briefly dominated film. But what made me realize I wasn't as educated in film as I thought I was was The Hollywood Ten, which I didn't know existed.
The Hollywood Ten area group of 10 writers and directors who, in the late 1940's and early 1950's were forced to testify to congress due to an investigation by the House Un-American Activities Committee. The committee was investigating Hollywood in the belief that it was spreading communist propaganda.
Many of The Hollywood Ten were registered communists or communist sympathizers and saw this investigation as against their freedoms and against the constitution. So they all refused to testify and were jailed for contempt of congress. Even after they were released from prison, they were blacklisted from working in Hollywood for over a decade.
I find these kinds of stories extremely interesting. Its amazing the level of hypocrisy among the US Government, who love to criticize other governments for persecution of political rivals or just people with other political beliefs and then turn around and do the same thing. I admire the bravery these men had to stand up the the government when it was being unjust.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
An artificial intelligence drawing made from the prompt, "cutting the television cord"

# data[].attributes.body
There was an idea mentioned in chapter 8 that has been at the top of my mind for a while now. It brought up the idea of "cutting the cord". Over the past ten years or so, there has been a growing number of people who have been cancelling their tv subscriptions in favor of either cutting of television entirely, or replacing it with streaming services. In fact, I don't have cable and just use streaming services. While I think that it was the right move to do, I am starting to notice a trend in streaming, that if you want to stay active in popular culture, you must have access to several streaming services, and it is starting to reach similar prices to cable.
The text cites an example of a man named Jim Romenesko having to pay $203 a month for cable, which is entirely absurd. But when you start to add together the number of subscription services, it can add up fast. Thankfully, I pool together funds with other people for a collective use of streaming services, but the prices can get out of hand. We use Netflix, Hulu, Max, Prime Video, Paramount+, YouTube Premium, Disney+, AppleTV+, and Dropout. The cost for multiple people using all of these different services ends up approaching around $150 dollars monthly, which is a sizable amount of money.
Once again, I am splitting this cost with others, but it is still insane that you have to pay that much in order to access the television programs you want to watch. What I am trying to show here is that cutting the cord is not entirely the correct answer. When we are seeing costs rise like this once again, we need to evaluate how cutting the cord has affected the market. Cable companies are dying because of it, yes, but streaming companies are swooping in to get that same profit for the same absurd costs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
The courthouse where citizen journalist, Zhang Zhan, was sentenced to prison for documenting the COVID-19 pandemic in a way that was against China's narrative.

# data[].attributes.headline
Examination & Definition of Citizen Journalism

# data[].attributes.subject
Examination & Definition of Citizen Journalism

# data[].attributes.body
While reading chapter 9, it had one of the most interesting concepts that I have seen in this class so far. The was the concept known as Citizen Journalism. My definition of Citizen Journalism is when an average citizen collects and distributes information to others, typically via the internet.
The first example is one that the text acknowledges in the murder of George Floyd on May 25, 2020. This entire case would have gone extremely differently if it wasn't for the video that multiple citizens recorded that showed the police officer pinning and killing George Floyd. That example of citizen journalism spread the word of this tragedy and riled up the public enough, that for once, a police officer is facing repercussions for their terrible acts.
Another example of citizen journalism comes from a country not well known for its freedom of press, China. During the initial outbreak of COVID-19, China was extremely tightly sealed on what was happening regarding the virus. But it was a citizen journalist, Zhang Zhan, in Wuhan, both from a physical aspect and from the larger social climate of the area, that was able to document what was going on for the world. In response to this information, the Chinese government has arrested him and gave him four years in prison.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Screenshot from the reveal trailer of the recently announced video game remake, Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater.

# data[].attributes.headline
Current Article: Trends in the Gaming Industry

# data[].attributes.subject
Current Article: Trends in the Gaming Industry

# data[].attributes.body
I have played video games for all of my life and I don't see myself stopping playing them anytime soon. It is deeply apart of what has made me me and the stories they tell have moved me throughout my life. So I have always tried to keep up with what is happening in the larger gaming sphere. And so, the article, 7 Huge Gaming Industry Trends 2023-2026, written by Josh Howarth, immediately caught my eye. There is a lot happening so I'm going to focus on the three most
The first trend I want to look at shows the continuing rise of Roblox. Roblox has been a powerhouse in gaming and especially in the rise of indie game development. However, one thing the article neglects is how dismally indie game developers are treated when working on games using Roblox which could be some interesting insight into Roblox's growth. Linked here is a fantastic Youtube video about the mistreatment of Roblox developers.
The next trend I wanted to look at is the rise of alternative PC gaming platforms in the face of the industry juggernaut, that is Steam. Steam, developed by Valve in 2003, has been the go to platform for purchasing video games on PC for the past 20 years. They have had a monopoly on the PC gaming market for the vast majority of that time, but as pointed out in the article, platforms like GOG and The Epic Games Store have risen up and threatened Steam's dominance. And as someone who wrote a 10 page essay on the benefits of anti-trust laws and the dissolution of monopolies, I am all for more choices in the PC gaming platform space.
The last trend, and I think the most important trend from an artistic point of view, is the swarm of reboots and remakes flooding the market. There has been many many successful game series that have chosen to focus on remaking their more famous classic games rather than focusing on making new experiences. These remakes are making lots of money, similarly to a similar trend in film with a reliance on reboots. But I believe that the gaming industry properly thrives on innovation and creativity and that constant remakes are going to have a negative effect on the game series we all enjoy to play.

# data[].attributes.body
While I was reading chapter 9, I was able to identify many of the figures that it references when talking about the conception of our digital age. I knew of Ray Tomlinson's creation of email and I knew of Larry Page & Sergey Brin founding Google. But one figure I had never heard of was Tim Berners-Lee. Berners-Lee is probably the most influential figure when it comes to computers that I had never heard of.
Berners-Lee is mainly known for his work in writing two key bits of code for the internet, being http and html. The first thing he made was http, which is the basic rules of sending and receiving tons of types of media, text, photos, videos, etc. It is due to Berners-Lee that almost all forms of social media exist today. Additionally, he wrote HTML, which became the basis of every website on the internet.
The additional part that shocked me the most out of all of Berners-Lee's deeds, is that he intentionally refused to monetize any of his inventions. In a form of technology where seemingly every aspect of it is monetized, I commend Berners-Lee in his belief that the internet should be accessed by all for free. I think that the internet would be much better off if more of the most influential people in the internets inception were like Tim Berners-Lee.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
An mashup image of Disney's Winnie the Pooh and the President of China, Xi Jinping

# data[].attributes.body
While reading chapter 11, one of the most interesting concepts within it was the various theories of how the government and the media interacted with each other, and the most intriguing of them was communist theory. The text shows how both authoritarian and communist theory are decently similar, but in my reading of it, here is the definition of communist theory. The communist theory of press is where the press is inseparably tied to the government and directly serves the goals of the government.
The most famous example of communist theory in practice is its namesake, The Soviet Union. It is well known at this point that a major contributor to the strength of the Soviet Union was its control over its own media. It only allowed the publication of media that was either directly supporting the union or directly going against its enemies.
Another more modern example of communist theory is in a supposedly communist country, China. Like the Soviet Union, China has a strict control on the press that outlaws any negative press relating to the country. Infamously, Winnie the Pooh is completely outlawed in China because of joking comparisons between Winnie and the president of China, Xi Jinping.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Social Media Influencer, Logan Paul, who is well known for his sports drink, Prime, and for his numerable Cryptocurrency scams.

# data[].attributes.headline
Top Marketing Trends You Should Watch in 2023 Article & Influencer Marketing

# data[].attributes.subject
Top Marketing Trends You Should Watch in 2023 Article & Influencer Marketing

# data[].attributes.body
I really loved reading all of the articles for this week's module. I think it is extremely important to understand the media forces that are all around us and learning about large media conglomerates' histories. But the most interesting article to me was one about how a newer part of media is affecting a much older part of media, how social media and its influencers affect marketing in the digital age.
This article, written by Scott Clark on the website CMSWire, goes into depth about how marketing is changing going forward. And the most interesting part speaks about how the online influencer or creator affects marketing. There is a fantastic quote that marks the difference between an online influencer and an online creator. Clark quotes Megan Conahan saying, "'Notice I said creators and not influencers,' she said. 'Influencers are going to be left back in 2022. We have seen an erosion of trust in influencers who will partner with any brand that pays. With an increased focus on authenticity, influencers have no place here.'"
In this quote, Conahan states that influencers are more advertise with little thought put into what they are advertising and that influencers are more vapid and inauthentic while creators are more authentic. I just found the line between those two concepts to be extremely interesting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Promotional Image for Season 4 of Succession

# data[].attributes.headline
The Fox Media Empire & The Murdoch Family

# data[].attributes.subject
The Fox Media Empire & The Murdoch Family

# data[].attributes.body
I have been a massive fan of HBO's Succession since its premier back in 2018. I have loved to see the messed up Roy family fight for control over their media empire, Waystar Royco. And I had heard that it was based off of the founders of Fox, a family called the Murdochs but I knew extremly little about them and now, thanks to chapter 3, I learned a good bit more about their media empire. And the more and more I read, the more I saw the comparisons between the story of the Roy family in Succession and the real life story of the Murdoch family.
Rupert Murdoch started his empire from the ground up, only starting with a single newspaper that he had inherited from his father and over the course of 50 or so years, had built a massive, intercontinental empire. Now I don't agree with many of the politics displayed on Fox's various newspapers and other news programs, but it's hard not to acknowledge the incredible amount of success and wealth that has been accumulated with those politics. And I think the key to that success is how well Fox has adapted over the past few decades.
According to the text, Fox shifted much more into entertainment industry in the 1980's as the USA wanted to focus less on the harsh reality and escape into tv and movies and now with the current downturn in broadcast television, the Murdochs sold off most of their cable channels and movie production studios to Disney in an effort to streamline back into politics. I find the adaptability of Fox and more so the Murdochs at its helm to be incredibly fascinating.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Cover image to a good article about the textbook industry written by Karl Hughes and linked here, https://www.karllhughes.com/posts/textbook-industry-revolution

# data[].attributes.body
While reading chapter 4, the most interesting aspect that drew my attention was an analysis and history of the textbook industry. Now the reason I was drawn to it is probably pretty obvious, being a college student, but I found the shift in the industry extremely interesting. Seeing the dramatic drop in prices over the past few years is extremely interesting especially when I realized I only paid $55 dollars for my textbooks for my two classes over this summer semester. This is because of two of the concepts the text brings up about how the textbook industry is changing.
The first is about how I got the textbook for this class, which is renting it from the SRJC bookstore. Renting has been a major change since it is significantly cheaper than buying a textbook. Additionally, many students don't use their textbooks after their classes, so just from the perspective of keeping a tidy bookshelf, renting makes sense as well.
The other concept is how I got my textbook for my nature of mathematics class, which is an e-textbook. This option is significantly cheaper than buying a physical textbook since there is no need to worry about the physical printing costs of a tactile textbook. Additionally, buying an e-book gives the textbook rather than renting gives you the text and the knowledge it contains for longer while also not having a physical textbook cluttering up a room.
Overall, I think this recent revolution in the textbook industry with renting texts and e-books being extremely helpful in driving prices down and overall helping the students instead of the corporations that manufacture the text.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Promotional image for Spider-Man 3 (2007)

# data[].attributes.body
While reading chapter 2, there was one specific concept that leaped out at me that gave a phrase to a feeling that I have known for a long time, that phrase being Ownership Effects. Ownership Effects is the idea of how owners or controllers of media affect the media that is being sent out on their platform.
For example, there has been one good movie that, in my eyes, was made worse by ownership effects, that being Spider-Man 3. The director of the film, Sam Raimi, was initially planning a simple story revolving around the villains, Harry Osbourne and Sandman, but due to the popularity of the comic character, Venom, both Marvel themselves and producers such as Avi Arad forced the inclusion of the character in a movie that was already planned out. This led to many fans being disappointed by a movie with too many villains that ended up ruining the movie. This is a classic example of how the owner/controller of a form of media affected it, and therefore altered it in the minds of the consumer.
Another example of ownership effects, which is slightly more complicated is the recent purchase of Twitter by Elon Musk. The Tesla founder purchased Twitter for $44 billion dollars, and has since been firing people and enforcing new policies in an attempt to make his money back. This has led to the public seeing Twitter in a new light because of the change in ownership.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
An AI drawing from the prompt, doom scrolling

# data[].attributes.body
Out of all of the articles enlisted within this week's current articles, the one that caught my eye the most one written by Caitlin Cassidy of The Guardian entitled "Doomscrolling linked to poor physical and mental health". The article goes into depth about recently investigated and researched potential sideffects to "doomscrolling". It's important to understand Cassidy's definition of the term since it is key to the article. She states that, "Doomscrolling is the tendency to 'continue to surf or scroll through bad news, even though that news is saddening, disheartening or depressing', a practice researchers found has boomed since the onset of the pandemic." (Cassidy) I believe this to be a very apt definition as someone who has doomscolled in the past many a time. Cassidy mentions several studies that show that the constant interaction with the volatile state of the world and the even more volatile internet landscape can lead to vague mental health problems.
I overall really liked this article, I though it explained the concept of doomscrolling, which many people don't completely comprehend very well. However, I thought that some of the research is a little vague, just using umberella terms like 'mental health problems'. But I do believe that that is the way it is because of how recent and new this concept is and even more so how recent studies into it have begun. Additionally, I found another article that by Shelby Deering of VeryWellMind.Com that compiled research giving slightly more specifics, stating, "Daily doomscrolling isn’t a wise idea if you’re striving for good mental health. 'It’s bad for your mental health because there is no real benefit to doomscrolling,' Brigham notes. 'It only makes you more anxious and paranoid about the world around you.'" (Deering).
Overall I think this sort of analysis on the concept of doomscrolling and the wider effects of social media is extremely interesting and something that needs to be explored much deeper in the future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Artistic Representational of a time spiral, symbolic of time repeating.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the most intriguing aspects of chapter 1 was the seven secrets, and one of the most interesting to me was secret four, being the concept that nothing is new. While reading I started to notice patterns that I have seen individual aspects of in my life but had never pieced all the parts of the pattern together.
I remember learning about the Comics Code Authority, which arose in the 1950's as a way to protect the youth from the perceived dangers and immorality of comic books. I remember learning about the 'satanic panic' revolving around Dungeons & Dragons in the 70's & 80's when people believed it was spreading immoral and satanic messages. I have had relatives tell me that me playing video games like God of War and The Legend of Zelda were instilling violent messages in my mind and that video games should be banned.
Even just reading that last paragraph probably shows the repetitiveness that exactly displays the concept of secret four. I had heard the phrase 'history repeats itself' but I didn't put together the connection with media and how media is seen by the masses. Comics, D&D, Video Games, and many other forms of media have been vilified in the past and many more will be in the future, such is the nature of the fourth secret.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Photo of George Gerbner, Professor of Communication at schools such as Temple University, Villanova University, and University of Pennsylvannia.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the most interesting topics covered in the second chapter was the research that was done by George Gerbner. His studies led to the concept of Cultivation Analysis, which is theory where the overconsumption of media often leads to warped views of reality. Now Gerbner would get lots of backlash over his research from specifically television network executives, claiming that it was a blanket statement and didn't give enough specifics depending on the show. The examples of this in the text was given by two violent programs, Road Runner, the Looney Tunes cartoon, and Saw, a horror movie that helped coin the term, "Torture Porn". Both wildly different messages, but both violent. Gerbner's reaction to all of this was a new theory, Mean World Syndrome.
Mean World Syndrome (MWS) was the idea that the overconsumption of television led to its watchers becoming more paranoid and scared people. In my mind, this isn't that far off from his older Cultivation Analysis theory, it just focused in on the medium of television and the reaction of paranoia. I think that key difference is why MWS intrigued me. I recently viewed a video from a Youtube content creator that went into depths about how the drug fentanyl was portrayed in television shows, specifically ones about police officers, I have linked that video here (He also has a fantastic series all about copaganda in tvs and movies). He spoke about how the dangers of fentanyl are blown way out of proportion, with these shows saying that skin contact or breathing air in a room where fentanyl is as dangerous when that has been proven false by studies such as a report from the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, which is linked here. This has led to the greater public being extremely paranoid over a drug that, while still dangerous, is nowhere near the lethal force that television is portraying it as. This exact situation is an example of MWS and I find that extremely interesting.
Overall, I think that both Mean World Syndrome and Cultivation Analysis are extremely critical to understanding how we view media but I found Mean World Syndrome just a bit more intriguing due to the specifics of it in our modern world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Two influencers, Logan Paul and KSI promoting their energy drink brand, Prime.

# data[].attributes.body
While looking through the current articles for chapter 12 there was one concept that really jumped out at me from the articles. That was from CBS10 Boston's article, "Influencers Can Sway What People Buy. This New Trend Is Just the Opposite" written by Ale Zimmerman and Leslie Gaydos. The article speaks a lot about the amount of influence content creators have when it comes to advertising specifically.
It gives a really interesting statistic that around 52% of the user base of TikTok additionally uses the platform to inform themselves on products which I find peculiar. I try to be very informed whenever I am looking into buying something, I look into what product is the longest lasting, how environmentally conscious it is, and where I can get it for the best price. It find it fascinating how people are so quick to listen to random people on TikTok that they have never met and never interacted with. The article defines a deinfluencer as someone who is completely honest about having a brand deal to promote a product. I think that is a very important distinction in an online space that is so often filled with disinformation that infleuncers are disclosing if they are being paid to promote something.
The article continues on how deinfluencers sway their viewers by basically saying, "Don't buy that, buy this instead". When I hear of that, I think of Logan Paul and KSI, who are both fiscally successful content creators, and who both made a platform on being honest about their past controversies and brand deals, who founded their own energy drink brand, Prime. They both used their platforms to market it, never outright saying it, but implying that Gatorade and Monster Energy were subpar products and that Prime. Their personal stake in Prime is very clear to the viewers, but their promotion of it still works.

# data[].attributes.body
I was always reluctant to download TikTok. Ever since it's initial surge in popularity in 2018, I have always said that I would never download Tiktok. I thought it was 'cringe' and 'weird', but that was stemming out of what 15 year old me thought in 2018 and never changed until recently. I was finally pressured into getting TikTok in December of 2022 and have used it almost daily since.
Part of reluctance to download TikTok is do to a worry of my private information getting out somehow. However, I did not fully put together that due to my other interactions with social media and the internet as a whole, that information about me is already out there. I think that this is indicative of a thought that many people in my generation believe, that our personal information is already out there, so who cares if I keep giving it out.
Another important aspect of TikTok is how the US government has responded to it. TikTok is made by a Chinese company and the US government has attempted to protect US citizens from any potential breaches of privacy. And while I think protecting from breaches of privacy is amazing, it's interesting to see how the US reacts to a company controlled by a foreign power versus a US company both doing similar things. Companies like Meta and Snapchat have faced little repercussions for breaches of privacy compared to TikTok.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
A promotional poster for Marvel Studios' Shang-Chi, where on the bottom right of the poster, a BMW car is prominently displayed.

# data[].attributes.body
One thing that I have noticed the more and more I watch movies and television, is the amount of random products that are seen onscreen. It was only within the past few years when I really began to understand the ramifications behind such products and the concept of product integration as a whole. It makes sense that movie and television show executives would want to make more money with more ads and it makes sense that advertisers want to make money by advertising in the program itself, so the audience can't fast forward through it or divert their attention elsewhere. I find interesting how blatant it has become however.
Recently, in 2021, Marvel Studios came under fire for prominently featuring a BMW car on the marketing material for their movie, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings. This is quite bizarre because this is not just product placement within the film, but it is actively being displayed in that film's marketing material as well. And while I do think the movie is good, I find it disconcerting that product integration has gone this far.
This is less so important, but there is one funny example of product placement in the show, 30 Rock. 30 Rock uses one of its characters, who is a greedy studio executive, to directly promote the product to camera without any subtlety. I just find that method of promotion specifically really interesting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
An image from a new program covering the Tylenol Murders of 1982

# data[].attributes.headline
Analysis of Johnson & Johnson's Crisis Communication in 1982.

# data[].attributes.subject
Analysis of Johnson & Johnson's Crisis Communication in 1982.

# data[].attributes.body
I was unaware of the history of Tylenol going into reading chapter 13, so I found the events of 1982 to be extremely fascinating. It was a tragedy that Johnson & Johnson navigated the company through in a pretty fantastic way. And while recently the company has been responding to crisis pretty terribly I want to go over what I think made their initial reaction in 1982 so fantastic.
The main thing that Johnson & Johnson did was having an honest and clear line of communication. They let the media and the public know what was happening when they were learning of it as well. And when they found out that the cause was someone putting Cyanide into Tylenol capsules, they acted in the best interest of the public and recalled all Tylenol in the USA. This, from the public's point of view, is the extremely responsible thing to do, and establishes a sense of trust with the public.
The other thing that Johnson & Johnson did well was quickly fixing the problem. When they did relaunch they updated their capsules to have more layers to make them extremely difficult to tamper with. This is also key into establishing trust with the public, and basically saying, "This will not happen again".
Like I said earlier, Johnson & Johnson's recent crisis communication when it comes to asbestos being found in baby powder has been pretty terrible, but this 1982 example is, I believe, a master class in crisis communication.