JOUR1111 Blog 11, Lecture 11, Monday 28th May

Quite simply the last lecture was my favourite, and not just for the obvious reason. It felt by far the most relevant to me. I may never be a word changing sophisticated journalist but getting online to share my knowledge, opinions and (questionable) humour is what really excites me. It doesn’t take long to look at my body of work and see where my interest lies; I, with no shame, want to write about music. That’s my attraction to journalism, the fact it gives you this power to work with what interests you. I spend my days blasting friends, family and randoms with my deconstructions of music. A lot of the time it’s all I want to do; discuss, muse and share my opinions of music. And above all I want to entertain people while I do it. I want people to want to read what I write. The thing is I know there is a place for that; I have a whole stack of heroes who inhabit the internet doing what I want to do so I know I can. 

JOUR1111 Blog 11, Lecture 11, Monday 21st May

Investigative journalism is petrifying. From the outside it seems that every aspect of it is riddled with danger and hard work; everything is against you. The very nature of investigative journalism is you’re attempting to find out something that someone doesn’t want you to know. You can be sued, shunned, arrested, defamed or hurt and yet somehow this all makes it feel more glamorous. Investigative journalism appeals to peoples’ sense of righteousness. It is the outsider’s method of combatting the injustices of the world and that’s what makes it great. There is a definite power fantasy that goes along with people’s desire to be investigative journalists; it allows someone to put their social conscience above everything else. People want to change the world; they want to be a martyr for their cause and this gives them their means.

As much as I see the attraction I don’t think I could ever be an investigative journalist. As I said it is petrifying.  I think I’m too non-confrontational which makes me shit scared of pissing anyone off. It also begs the question of whether one person has the right to decide what should be known by the public. Lies and secrets aren’t necessarily bad things (that said they frequently aren’t good things), they can be to protect or help people and exposing them could be harmful. Anyway I’m really just making excuses for my inability to ask the hard questions and it’s all the nature of the beast so long live investigative journalism.  

JOUR1111 Blog 10, Lecture 10, Monday 14th May

I care about Masterchef, I have an opinion on Nick D’arcy’s right to hold a gun and I think that the biggest variation in party policy in Australia is gay marriage; am I simple and ignorant with a limited view of the world? Yes. But it also has a hell of a lot to do with agenda setting our lecture served to illustrate. These issues are the ones that get high attention from the media and in turn garner importance from me. How am I meant to know about atrocities on the other side of the world when I am being fed on a diet of what sells, it is only natural to think that the things that get attention are important. 

   

While I admit to being merely a plebe at the mercy of the industry when it comes to what to think about (first level agenda setting) I do like to take the high and mighty stance of being above being told what I think about these issues (second level agenda setting). I think possibly people on the whole are a lot less susceptible to this due to their contrary nature. In my experience people like to oppose what they are being told (although maybe all my friends are just jerks) particularly when it’s by the establishment. For every person jumping on the Kony 2012 bandwagon there were just as many laughing it in the face for no other reason than to spite the others. I am not here to argue with the agenda setting, its effects are irrefutable, but just to note that it’s far from the be all and end all on the public’s opinions.

Oscar + Martin/Order 66

In a display of terrible unprofessionalism I’m about to write two of the briefest and least founded reviews I ever hope to write. Thankfully, though, I’m not professional in any manner of the word and am therefore not bound by any standard of quality (also I’m lazy).

On the night of Saturday the 28^th I headed out to the city with a group of people for a friend’s 18^th. The whole night was a confusing mess of a journey but in the interests of brevity and relevance I’ll isolate my ramblings to the more ‘musical’ side of the night.

A drunken text from the birthday boy gave us instructions to meet him at a club, or bar, or some other venue that an 18-year-old can try and fill their body cavity with overpriced alcohol on a Saturday night. On the way to said alcohol dispensary we passed a motley looking lot of safety pinned, leather jacketed, cheaply hair dyed punks milling around a dingy looking stairway, like some sort of anachronistic 70s throwback (albeit much more middle aged than a typical 70s punk crowd). This sort of crowd alone is enough to have drawn me in, but it seems that my friends do not share the same taste in seedy middle aged punks. I did manage to stall long enough to Google the event on my phone’s infuriatingly lacklustre internet and find out that they were attending the album launch for a local Brisbane punk band called “Order66”.But the bonds of kinship far outweigh my love of shitty punk music so on to the 18^th we headed.   

We arrived at the “The Bridge Club” to find that there was a band we had never heard of playing inside and that it would cost us $15 to get in. While kinship may be stronger than my love of shitty punk, collectively we had to strongly consider if it was stronger than our love of not wasting money.  After reassurance that the band, now known to be “Oscar + Martin”, was good, and my own personal realisation that I could always write a review  of the show, we eventually forked over the cash, just in time to entirely miss the opening acts.  

After meeting up with the birthday group, we waited for the two men, who I can only assume are named Oscar and Martin, to take the stage. As we did this a friend silently pointed at the man in front of us, mouth agape. My confusion quickly turned to astonishment as I recognised that I was standing next to the wild dancing man from the Splendour line-up video, he was even wearing the shoes from the video. After taking many group photos and fondling his beard he lifted up the birthday boy and made the whole crowd sing him happy birthday.

This event conveniently filled the silence while the two men tried to sort out their gear on stage where they seemed to be having some difficulty with the sound guys. When they finally started up we were hit with warm synth fuzz, pulsing programmed drums and RnB vocals. While definitively indie (the crowd’s outfits were a dead giveaway) it was constructed from a very original amalgamation of genres which gave the style definition of its own. Unfortunately that didn’t stop the song from feeling bland and boring with a lack of direction.  And then, during one of the singers many ventures into the realms of falsetto, disaster struck (slight overstatement). Feedback hit us thick and fast, its unbearable screech filling out ears like molten lead (slight over-dramatisation). The sound guy immediately pulled the plug on the microphone but from that point on whenever they tried to give the singer any volume the feedback crept back in and they were forced to turn him back down again (entirely accurate boring sentence). Without any discernable vocals their next song, which would have otherwise been a middle of the road, indie, synth track, turned into a quite engaging trance song. To give credit where it’s due, that’s versatility.

At this point a friend and I had a debate over whether you could classify the music as shoegaze. In an attempt to settle it I stared at my shoes during the next song, to great success. We came to the conclusion that while not traditionally shoegaze it was not inappropriate to describe it as such. We also concluded that we had no desire to listen to anything resembling shoegaze, particularly with the sound issues still continuing to control the show, so we gathered the troops together and, slightly apprehensively, headed down the road to “Fat Louie’s” where we had seen the milling punks earlier.

Upstairs we were met by dim lights, questionable cleaning standards and a small gaggle of nihilistic punks on the dance floor. In the corner of said floor were “Order 66” screaming their lungs out above their cacophony of crash cymbals and pounding power chords. “Finally some real music,” proclaimed the birthday boy as we dodged the multitude of stomping “DocMartens” which were the footwear of choice for the footwear of choice for the modern moshing masses. While it doesn’t feel entirely correct to agree with his statement, there is something to be said of the raw energy of Order 66 compared to the refined and subdued music of Oscar + Martin. Of course my own personal biases towards Order 66’s blend of 80s style hardcore punk mixed with the pop and ska punk of the 90s entirely void my comparative opinion. There is, though, some merit in the fact that, even though I was only present for about 4 songs, I had more fun in at this free concert from an unknown band in a scungy bar amongst these middle aged, era confused, counter culture cretins (I may have just been overly harsh on them in my desire for alliteration) than I have had on so many other nights out.  

JOUR1111 Blog 9, Lecture 9, Monday 30th April

This week’s lecture is on news values. What I gathered is that news values are the defining features of what something needs to be to be news worthy. The lecture broke these values into impact, audience identification, pragmatics and source influence. I really love the definitive nature of this because I’m the sort of person who likes defined rules for things, at least so I know when I’m breaking them, and these four points make a really good checklist for knowing what’s worth writing about. As if to illustrate the functionality of these values a friend of mine was telling me just the other day that he will read anything provided it is about “The World’s Something-iest Something”. This may serve as the most single minded demonstration of the attraction of impact.

At the same time these values do show the consumerist nature of the news. Its purpose in the end is to sell and for this to happen is has to be what people want, it has to entertain them in some manner and these values really do play to that need.  No matter how large, relevant or important the news if it doesn’t adhere to the values people don’t want to hear about it and it may never see the light of day. The overall effect of this phenomenon seems to me to be a remarkable focus on samey, pop news which is relatively minor in the scale of things.

But really is that such a bad thing; I’m painting consumerism in news in a negative light I realise but since when is ignorance a sin and furthermore who am I to decide. People are interested in what interests them (I state in a wondrous piece of redundancy).  It makes perfect sense for people to only want to hear what they care about and what’s your integrity worth if no one is paying any attention to it. This point brings us full circle, it’s not news unless someone cares and that’s why we have news values; to say what people care about. 

Annotated Bibliography

Obama seeks leverage off gay-marriage endorsement, heads to more fundraisers. (2012). Retrieved from Foxnews.com website: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/14/obama-heads-to-commencement-fundraisers-to-backdrop-gay-marriage-decision/

The article does not explicitly state who wrote it but does say that "The Associated Press contributed to this report." Associated Press's position as a long running, worldwide, independent, not-for-profit cooperative should ensure that the source information is accurate (Ekstrand, V. S. 2009). Fox News, conversely, are notoriously right wing and oppose such issues as same-sex marriage (Fleming, J. J. 2012) and are likely to manipulate information to represent these views.  This article chose to focus on the negative electoral implications of President Obama's support of gay marriage by way of implied comparison between the social focus of the Democrat's campaign and the economic focus of the Republicans'. Fox painted Obama's decision in a negative light, implying it was a purely politically motivated move by only discussing it as such and then using various statistics and sources to devalue it as a political move.  Fox uses the opinions of former Democratic strategist, Kirsten Powers, to support their case thereby distancing themselves from their well-known Republican bias. The article cleverly downplays the moral issues of the subject matter in favour of a political angle successfully criticising Obama's stance. 

Endo, S. (2012, May 12). African-American voters react to President Obama's shift on shift on same sex marriage, CNN. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsG4p0RPZ24

Sandra Endo's CNN TV news report is focused around African-American Christians' reaction to Obama's support of Same Sex Marriage. Led by the opinions of Reverend Ralph Martino of the First Church of Washington, the report suggested that black voters, in particular, are disapproving of same-sex marriage. These opinions contrast CNN's own generally pro-liberal stance (War & American Society. 2005) The Reverend states that such an institution contradicts scripture and that they are concerned with the decisions of the President they formerly supported. He then consolidates this by saying that this will not sway the votes of the vast majority of his congregation but instead they will pray that he sees the error of his ways. Such matters of opinion have very little room for conjecture. Endo then uses collected data to show that while opposition to same-sex marriage is higher in the black community such opposition is lessening. This leads to a secondary focus of the report looking at how Obama's decision will affect the voting of the black community where through questioning the public and through use of expert Johnathon Rauch, Endo suggests there will be very little change in the voting of the public in wake of the decision. CNN's report focused on showing the opinions of a select demographic and did not push a political or moral agenda in favour of focusing on a social angle. 

Baker, P., & Sussman, D. (2012, May 14). Obama’s Switch on Same-Sex Marriage Stirs Skepticism, The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/us/politics/poll-sees-obama-gay-marriage-support-motivated-by-politics.html

Working as a pair, author, Peter Baker, and polling editor, Dalia Sussman, bring considerable political knowledge to this New York Times article. Baker in particular, being a leading reporter as far back as the Lewinsky scandal, is well versed in political happenings. This coupled with the wide held view of The New York Times as a trustworthy and respectable provider of quality journalism (Mihal, C. 2012) makes for a credible and informed article. Like the Fox News article the focus lies on the political implications of Obama’s decision. The two authors wrote next to none of their own opinions relying entirely on statistics and quotes as evidence to build their article. Through the use of these statistics and quotes they showed it is a held opinion that due to the manner in which Obama’s decision was released it came off as being more politically calculated than principled. Following this they then moved to show that while same-sex marriage is a dividing issue for the American public it holds very little weight over the voters’ decisions, being considered well behind the economy by the masses. 

Hagerty, B. (2011). Apocalypse soon? British Journalism Review, 22(1), 3-4. doi:          10.1177/0956474810403035      

In this editorial Bill Hagerty gives his opinion on looming end of proffesional journalism in the face of ethical controversies surrounding the media. As a long time journalist, director of the London Press Club and editor of the British Journalism Review, Hagerty is well qualified to discuss the subject. He opens by saying that while the public may have been unaware of the ethical crisis it is well known amongst those involved with politics and law. He goes on to discuss that while underhanded acts have always been a part of journalism, comparing modern phone hacking to bribing a telex officer for information, the public is now far more sceptical and less willing to accept questionable ethics. “The old guidelines have been swept away,” says Hagerty, in relation to what journalists can now get away with.  The article closes with a discussion of the destructive effects of this change on journalism and the need for a standard to be established for its survival citing various examples. This oddly candid and casual admission of nefarious behavior amongst the media seems damaging but in wake of recent ethical revelations takes a back seat to journalism’s struggle for survival.

("CNN," 2005; Ekstrand, 2009; Fleming, 2012; Mihal, 2012)

References

. CNN. (2005) War & American Society. Thousand Oaks, USA: 'SAGE Publications'.

Ekstrand, V. S. (2009). Associated Press Encyclopedia of Journalism. Thousand Oaks, USA.

Fleming, J. J. (2012). Fox News Encyclopedia of Journalism. Thousand Oaks, USA.

Mihal, C. (2012). The New York Times Encyclopedia of Journalism. Thousand Oaks, USA: 'SAGE Publications'.

JOUR1111 Blog 8, Lecture 8, Monday 23rd April

Well I actually showed up to the lecture today, how novel. Unfortunately I picked the wrong week because, as I write, I’m currently being berated, along with the rest of the class, by Doctor Harrison, who has just spent the lecture, up till now, generally being a dick. By the brief snippets of egotism that are seamlessly inserted between relevant discussion I take it that he is important and well learned but I hardly think that justifies such subpar character.

Somewhat ironically, or perhaps fittingly, today’s lecture is on ethics. We were shown a whole selection of different ads of questionable ethics and asked to rate them on tastefulness and ethicality. Well supposedly questionable; I personally didn’t take offense to any of the advertisements but maybe that’s just part of being a desensitised teenager.

After this Doctor Harrison went on to discuss ethical paradigms and the briefly onto different codes of ethics surrounding different organisations. I can’t remember the three paradigms but I do remember the ever righteous Doctor making audacious comments about his particular favoured choice being the only ethically sound model and imploring us to read his book so we can all bask in his vast wisdom.

This blog mightn’t contain much substance in relation to what was actually discussed in the lecture but I feel this rant needed to be had to express just how much the good doctor’s unbearable personality overshone the content.

The Milli Vanilli Story

Robert “Rob” Pilatus and Fabrice "Fab" Morvan, born 1964 and 1966 respectively, were both working as break-dancers and models in Germany when they met and decided to form a rock/soul band. Both from humble beginnings the young pair were ecstatic to be approached by superstar producer Frank Farian in a nightclub in Munich in 1988. One cash advance and two signatures later Rob and Fab had officially become “Milli Vanilli”.

But there were dark undertones to this seemingly too good to be true story. Farian never wanted singers, he already had two of those; instead he needed these two good looking black men with exotic dreadlocks and a defined look to front his band because the ones he had, albeit talented musicians, were not, in his eyes, marketable enough. By the time this came to light for naive Rob and Fab they had already spent the cash they had been given, they were locked into contact.

It’s not even the first time Farian had pulled this trick. Boney M, the only band to appear twice on the UK’s all time highest selling singles, was actually Farian’s own singing behind a front of stage performers. Burgeoned by this huge accomplishment he felt he could replicate success with a new band.

Despite moral uncertainties the legally obliged Rob and Fab continued with the project. In 1988 “All or Nothing”, Milli Vannilli’s first album, was released. The cover art featured Rob and Fab and at no point did it credit the actual singers.  Initially released by record label, BMG, only in Europe the album slowly but surely garnered steam and by the time it reached number 1 on Australia’s ARIA Charts Milli Vannilli had caught the attention of Arista, the record label of Iggy Pop, Aretha Franklin and the Alan Parsons Project, amongst others.

Arista promptly rereleased “All or Nothing” under the new title of “Girl You Know It’s True” with a few tracks removed and a couple of new ones inserted. This version was released in the US where it took off like a rocket to the moon. Their first single “Girl You Know It’s True”, using the winning combination of American rap and European dance music which would come to define their style, reached number 2 on the American Billboard Charts in April 1989. In July Milli Vanilli’s second single “Baby Don’t Forget My Number”, surpassed their first to become their first number 1 on the American Charts. Their next two singles, “Girl I’m Going to Miss You” and “Blame It on the Rain.”

At this point in time only Michael Jackson, Paula Abdul, The BeeGees and George Michael had achieved more than Billboard number ones on a single album and Milli Vanilli were well on their way to joining them, with their fifth single, “All or Nothing”, reaching number 4 and still climbing, when things took a downward turn.  Charles Shaw, one of the actual, uncredited, singers came out to the media labelling Rob and Fab as frauds. And while Farian paid him $150,000 to retract his statement rumours still circulated and grew killing off record sales.

In spite of this Milli Vannilli were nominated for a Grammy for best new artist in 1990 which they won beating Neheh Cherry, Indigo Girls, Soul II Soul and Tone Lōc. In November 1990 Farian, under huge public pressure, officially admitted to the bands lip syncing immediately setting off one of the biggest controversies in music history. Their Grammy was revoked, their album production discontinued and their careers destroyed. Rob and Fab instantly the laughing stock of the musical world; ridiculed and tormented, they were the butt of every joke.

At this point everyone went their own way. The original singers, Charles Shaw and Brad Howe, now officially credited, along with the group’s female backup singers, released an album of original music under the name of “The Real Milli Vanilli” to moderate commercial success. The album, “The Moment of Truth”, is considered to be Milli Vanilli’s second studio album. Farian tried to dissociate himself from the scandal but at the same time attempted to rerelease a lot of the work using different singers. Rob and Fab hid from the public eye for a period, both taking the fall from grace quite hard. In 1992, in what turned out to be a miserable last hooarah, the pair released an album, using their own singing, under the name of “Rob and Fab” on independent label “Taj Records”. The album sold an abysmal 2000 copies and spelled the end for the couple. They soon fell out, each suffering from person issues. In particular Rob who took to depression and drugs. In 1996 he served jail time for assault, vandalism and attempted robbery. 

The travesty of it all was that none of this was new. Many hugely successful bands had used models and dancers as fronts for their performance. Farian’s Boney M; “The Weather Girls” of “It’s Raining Men” fame; and Milli Vanilli’s contemporaries “Black Box” all had lip syncing front men. Rob and Fab were just two young men caught in a whirlwind of contracts and dreams and one lie that got out of hand.

The saga ended in 1998 when Rob was found dead of an alcohol and prescription drug overdose in a Frankfurt hotel room. He was only 33. They may never had sung a note but as Milli Vanilli Rob and Fab sold seven million albums and 30 million singles and have forever secured themselves a place in musical history.

JOUR1111 Blog 7, Lecture 1, Monday 27th February

I thought I’d leave my blog of the first lecture till last giving myself the opportunity to make a poetic, wistful retrospective on my experiences of JOUR1111 up until this point but with an hour and a half till submission, an atrocious sleeping pattern and a general lack of wistfulness such grand plans are going to go hopelessly unfulfilled.

Journalism was my first lecture at university and looking back over the slides is making me quickly realise that even from the start I wasn’t paying as much attention as I probably should have as I don’t remember this lecture at all.

Considering I have a blog to fill and not a lot to talk about in relation to the lecture I might take this as an opportunity to talk about why I decided to study Journalism at university. Daria, the hero of the sardonic teen, once said, “My goal is not to wake up at age 40 with the bitter realisation that I have wasted my life on a job I hate.” I realised that I liked writing but more than that I wanted something that would keep changing, something that wouldn’t leave me stuck in a room running the same equations over and over again. I don’t care for changing the world or disillusioning the masses. Not for sneaking or snooping nor challenging the system. I just want to watch the world and say what I see and most of all score some free concert tickets.

JOUR1111 Blog 6, Lecture 7, Monday 16th April

Again bedridden with relapsed tonsillitis I missed this week’s lecture so I am relegated to watching it through Lectopia which every day I am becoming more thankful for. Lecture 6 is on public media to as a response to last week’s commercial media lecture.

The greater chunk of the lecture was spent generally discussing public media and its place in the media landscape and the world in general. Most of what was said I either already knew or had long suspected but I think I’ll take this as an opportunity to have a rant about the negative manner in which the ABC was treated during the lecture. Referred to as Aunty ABC and pegged as uncool in my experiences this is far from the normal perspective of my demographic.

Brought up as a child on ABC kids programming my first feelings towards ABC have always been hugely positive from an early age. With the recent addition of ABC3 I can only imagine such feelings will only increase amongst future generations. As I got older and drifted apart of children’s programming I still held ABC in the highest stead for having varied, original and interesting programs which gave it superior depth to other networks. When internet streaming removed the exclusivity of American commercial programming and the Australian commercial networks were left baring their flaking framework beneath their shiny façade only ABC and SBS maintained credibility and fan loyalties. Also, if there is even one form of large-scale media which the Australian youth feel a real connection to, in my experience, it is Triple J. Their support of new and alternative music combined with their youth focus has given them huge cultural significance amongst society’s youth.

My generation respects the ABC and I would have no hesitation in claiming it is the “coolest” of all Australian television networks at least. Maybe this is all just my experience but if it ever existed I think the mantle of Aunty ABC has long since been shifted. 

Lisa Mitchell - Spiritus

On the 27^th of March, Lisa Mitchell released “Spiritus”, the first single from her upcoming, unnamed album. It is Lisa’s first new release since her Australian Music Prize winning album, Wonder, in 2009.

Again working with producer Dann Hume, Spiritus is remindful of Wonder’s characteristic structure; bell tones layered on jangling piano on a base of warm, rolling, mid tempo percussion. Above this Lisa mixes her distinctive gentle tone, full of her individual, stylistic inflections with a previously unheard alternative style. The simple melody helps bring motif to the short verse chorus structure. Perhaps Spiritus’s weakest and strongest point is the unusual throaty elongated cries that are used as counterpoint to Lisa’s traditional singing style. Reminiscent of a Bjork eccentricity, these melismatic phrases stand out like misshapen mountains in a sea of subtlety. They are ear catching, defined and slightly offensive while not entirely unpleasant.

Beyond this Spiritus is punctuated by a distant chorus of “Won’t forget you, won’t forget you” which contrasts the foregrounded main vocals and serves to fill the white space in the mid frequencies between verses. The music captures the overarching theme of resilience in the face of loss epitomized by the build from the sullen line “Heart is lost” to the jubilant “And my love shines on” at the end of the chorus.

Lisa has successfully delivered a track of quality comparable to that of Wonder with delivering the heart-warming sincerity which has come to define her music. Uplifting and whimsical Spiritus bodes well for the yet to be announced album release.  

JOUR1111 Blog 5, Lecture 2, Monday 5th March

With the blog due date imminent some retroactive blogging is in order. I really wish I had been more aware of the assessment at the time because lecture 2 isn’t feeling as relevant on rewatch as it did at the time.

The lecture began with a discussion of “Web 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0”, terms which I had been somewhat familiar with but not really understood. It was actually very interesting to look at the progression of the internet. What’s interesting is when laid out in front of you its evolution makes perfect sense; the way in which its focus moved from large companies, to moderate size social groups and then to individual people. Each step is more functional and more complicated; it should have actually been very foreseeable.

The second half of the lecture was spent on entitlement and involved perhaps the single best demonstration of any university lecture I have been to, to date. I’m not quite sure why but I feel compelled to reiterate it. We were given a bag of jellybeans, allowed to eat one, then had them unexpectedly taken from us. I don’t think I had ever felt more wronged in my life which made it a perfect example of entitlement and a brilliant illustration of how the public will feel in the face of having to pay for previously free news.

Overall this was a though provoking lecture and it really made me look forward to the semester of journalism.

JOUR1111 Blog 4, Lecture 6, Monday 9th April

Due to an unforseen bout of tonsillitis I missed the week 6 lecture and instead watched it from my bed, on my computer, in the grips of a fever – just when I thought lectures couldn’t get any more fun… Still being sick I’m in no mood for pleasantries and really just want to knock over the main points.

The lecture had a large focus on discussing the Australian media landscape; who owns what. While I did have some idea of the properties of the different major corporations I had no notion of quite how vast their spread. It seems as if there are no independent media companies with enough scope to make an indent into the media landscape. I don’t pretend to understand the system but it seems to me like this is a recipe for monopolisation which in turn can lead to censorship so that we only receive the information which “they” want us to.

The other main point of discussion was in relation to this notion of corporate dominance, looking into the rolls of public verse commercial media. For this the interests of commercial and public media were discussed. While it seemed comforting to know not all media is governed by profit margins public media still has an agenda or else it wouldn’t exist.

If there is an overriding message from lecture 6 it is that all media is run with an underlying purpose which is never just to entertain or inform the viewer. 

Last Dinosaurs - In a Million Years

Brisbane has a burgeoning indie music scene and if I ever want to start getting free concert tickets as a journalist I had better start writing about it. Earlier this week “Last Dinosaurs” released their debut album “In a Million Years,” joining such acclaimed company as “Yves Klein Blue” and “John Steel Singers” as Brisbane bands on indie record label “Dew Process.” 

Last Dinosaur’s entry into the world of full length albums begins with their newest single, “Zoom.” Fittingly this track best represents the bands style of any on the album. An up-tempo rock beat, melodious guitar riff, plucky rhythm guitar, dancey bass and a ridiculously catchy vocal line. I haven’t been able to stop singing it all day. Unfortunately the band seemed to realise this is what they do best because the next three tracks are essentially just inferior rehashes of Zoom. Not that any of them are bad songs in their own rights it’s just that I would rather just listen to Zoom four times over.   

“Andy”, track 5, signifies a bit of a change for the album. While still in an undeniably similar vein to the opening songs, it pulls back the rhythm guitar and brings some very distinctive steel drums as well as distorted guitar and heavier rock beat. This all serves to make the track feel a little thicker and warmer than its predecessors as well as giving some much needed variation to the album. It is also a sign of things to come as the next track, “Satellites”, is an instrumental, ambient, interlude which splits the album into its two halves. Beginning with the echoing sounds of water washing ashore this hugely evocative, atmospheric track places you by the ocean in a brilliant lead up to the stand out song of the album.

“Weekend” smoothly continues the beach feel of Satellites, beginning with a mid tempo drum beat and a ringing guitar, straight out of 2000s surfer rock. It proceeds to move through the verses until it hits a midpoint where it builds and climaxes into the infectious vocal line of, “I’ll take you to the park, I’ll take you to the ocean, I’ll kiss you till its dark, I’ll go through all the motions.” The mood of the song switches from a slightly blue, chilled out feel into triumphant ode to youth. It’s the sort of song that will leave you smiling in the goofy sort of way that makes sure no one will sit next you on public transport.

Annoyingly, the next two tracks ruin all Last Dinosaurs’ good work. “I Can’t Decide” is a strongly punk influenced track with a feel bordering on over produced emo music. Its chorus is reminiscent of “Linkin Park” in the worst possible way. “Used To Be Mine” isn’t a terrible song but it’s just an irritatingly boring ballad not aided by a mix which totally obscures the vocals behind layers of echo and cymbals.    

Second to last is "Honolulu", Last Dinosaurs’ signature track, from their 2010 EP “Back from the Dead”, this brings them back to their indie style and their strength. The closer is “Repair”, a simple but endearing track which plays almost like closing credits to the album giving you time to reminisce over all the other songs. It is a warm and pleasant and one of the most listenable on the record.

“In a Million Years” is an album which captures ‘youth’. The album’s title comes from the lyric in Zoom, “In a million years, when we’re older” and that’s exactly the feel that you get from Last Dinosaurs, that they are revelling in their youth, so far from old age that it’s not even conceivable; rightfully so for a band who’s oldest member is 22. This is also demonstrated with the albums focus on beginnings, epitomised by the creed-like (creed as in statement of belief, not the terrible post grunge band) chant of “The story only just, it just began, surely it should never ever end” from Honolulu.

Overall it’s a pretty simple equation, if you’re the sort of person who likes a dancey indie rock album you could do a lot worse than “In a Million Years”. If you like plucky guitars, catchy melodies and gratuitous quantities of reverb you could do a lot worse than “In a Million Years”. If you have run out of Foal and Phoenix albums you could do a lot worse than “In a Million Years”. It is a solid start for a young a band with huge room for growth. Of the albums the songs that will be finding it on to my iPod are Zoom, Andy, Weekend and Repair. And if you’re the sort of person who likes quantifying abstract concepts I give Last Dinosaurs’ debut album 6/10.

JOUR1111 Blog 3, Lecture 5, Monday 26th March

So it got to 9:30 Sunday night, the day before my weekly lecture, before I realised I should probably listen to week 5’s sound lecture. It was also a convenient way to bridge the 42 minutes it takes for the washing machine to clean my clothes. Conversely downloading this lecture did use up 43.3mb of my valuable internet quota, as somehow less than 24 hours after having acquired this months refreshed quota I have used 400 of my 3000mb limit. This sound lecture also has the flaw of letting me use Facebook at the same time without the same level of guilt as using it in a lecture.

During the first radio interview I found that I felt quite disconnected both in relation to the speaker and to the relevance to my course. It was very focussed on specific skills relating to radio but lacked a broader picture. I felt far more connected during the second interview although it’s quite possible I just thought his radio voice was far less manufactured and irritating.

I can’t say I had a lot of strong feelings about the lecture on the whole but if I was to discuss one resounding theme it would be the focus on working for your audience. Just because you’re the one speaking doesn’t mean that your ideas are the ones that get to be expressed. That really stuck with me. As someone with copious amounts of opinions I find it easy to put them ahead of those of other people and not fairly represent both sides of an argument. This is not conducive to radio journalism, or journalism in general, and it will be in my best interests to try and remain conscious of this at all points in my writing. 

JOUR1111 Blog 2, Lecture 4, Monday 19th March

I’m going to come straight out and say that today’s lecture was, for me personally, the least provocative and interesting of the four JOUR1111 lectures I have attended. After last week’s debacle of not taking notes till halfway I made sure to write down anything that could have been important. But looking back over said notes I’m realising that nothing really stands out… well except for the part about Keira Knightley’s boobs but that’s only because I put that part in bold.

Today’s lecture started with it being pointed out that we must blog about all the lectures including those from before we set up the blog which means I now have to retroactively discuss lectures I barely remember, I’m not exactly sure how I’m going to go about that. After that initial housekeeping Bruce moved on to photo journalism and how it’s now a necessary skill for any journalist.  There wasn’t really too much of not from the information we were given – people have been telling stories through pictures since forever, there are certain things that make a good photo, Photoshop is extremely prominent in modern media.

One thing that was of particular interest was the “Rule of Thirds” which is a theory about how photos should be composed by keeping points of interest contained in a ‘third’ of the picture. The other thing that really impacted me, as it has been through this entire course, is the use of, seemingly gimmicky, technology in modern journalism. The concept of an iPhone being an appropriate tool for capturing photos for a major news story is just mind blowing for me. But at the same time the more I think about it the more I see the practicality. Photo journalism is all about capturing the moment, as was discussed in today’s lecture, is all about capturing the moment; there is no requirement for the pictures to have been taken on $5000 cameras with $2000 lenses, all that’s important is that you capture the moment. If there is one thing I took from today’s lecture that is it.  

A Note

I have been a pretty terrible blogger. I wrote all my blogs but I never really got around to uploading them so now, a couple of hours from the first due date I'm going to have to do a bulk upload.

Media Use Diary and Analysis

Date	Medium	How long	What
12/3/12	Computer	1:00pm – 2:00pm	Facebook, YouTube
	Computer	5:30pm – 7:00pm	Facebook, YouTube
Summary: Used Facebook for general chatting to friends. Looked at a few links related to bands from the content on there and read news stories I was linked to. YouTube was just used for listening to music
13/3/12	Computer	1:45am – 2:00am	Facebook
	Newspaper	3:10pm – 3:30pm	The Australian
	Computer	4:00pm – 6:00pm	Facebook, YouTube
	Computer	11:20pm – 11:50pm	Facebook
Summary: Used Facebook to contact friends. Entered a competition by sharing a link. Read linked news articles. Read The Australian in the doctor’s waiting room.
14/3/12	Computer	8:15am – 8:40am	Facebook, YouTube
	Computer	1:00pm – 1:40pm	Facebook, YouTube
	Computer	3:30pm – 4:00pm	Facebook
	Computer	4:30	Blog
Summary: Watched a vlog on YouTube. News related links through Facebook. Uploaded blog
15/3/12	Magazine	9:20am – 10:00am	Time Magazine
	Computer	11:00am – 12:00pm	Facebook
	Computer	2:20pm	Blog
	Computer	4:30pm – 6:00pm	Facebook, News
Summary: Set homepage to News.com.au. The Time Magazine was out of date. Blog uploaded
16/3/12	Computer	10:20am – 12:30pm	Facebook, YouTube
Summary: Very standard use
17/3/12	Computer	3:30am – 3:40am	Facebook
	Computer	6:00pm – 7:00pm	Facebook, YouTube
Summary: YouTube used for music
18/3/12	Computer	10:00am – 12:30pm	Facebook, YouTube, News, Music news
Summary: Read large quantities of music news. Internet data ran out, impossible to use.
19/3/12	-	-	-
Summary: No internet
20/3/12	-	-	-
Summary: Still no internet….
21/3/12	Computer	3:15pm – 4:00pm	Facebook
Summary: Used a friends computer to check my Facebook

,

My media usage is currently defined almost entirely by my living circumstances. As I live at college on 

campus I have minimal access to television, no commute during which to listen to the radio and no newspapers or magazines around so, quite simply, I go without these traditional forms of media, as demonstrated in my media diary. It is worth noting that newspapers, television and radio are sources of news for 51.6%, 71.1% and 39.1% of surveyed students respectively, placing me in a minority but at the same time I doubt that these students share my living circumstances. In place of these old media I have a high reliance on modern media, namely the internet. Of my total media usage logged 965 minutes were spent on new media, opposed to 60 minutes on old media (which occurred entirely in waiting rooms). Ignoring the two days during which I had no media use (discussed later) I spent an average of 2 hours on the internet daily. 

Starting from the 19^th there is a notable absence of any media use due to my internet data quota running out. To say I had no interaction with media during this time would be untrue as it is impossible as, in day to day life, you are exposed to media from outside sources, but during this period I set aside no time for media usage. This dry patch was broken on day 10 when I began to suffer severe Facebook deprivation and went out of my way to use a friend’s internet so I’d be able to check my ‘wall’. This is somewhat understandable as Facebook was my dominant form of media during the diarised period which seems to be fairly standard considering the 91.9% of the surveyed students stated that Facebook was where they spent most of their time online. 

For a final graph I wanted to create a pie chart of how I divided my time amongst various forms of media but as I began to create my diary it soon became evident that it would be impossible. There was almost no point during which I was engaged in only one form of media whilst online. During a standard session I would log onto Facebook whenever I wasn’t doing work on the computer and begin chatting, at this same time I would also be listening to music, navigating links of interest from Facebook and searching through YouTube videos. Attempting to separate the different uses would be futile. I feel this is backed up by the fact there were 2292 responses to “what do you spend most your time online doing” meaning that each person voted on average 5.3 times. In contrast, during the both periods I was using ‘old media’ I was engaged in only one form.

From these points I can create a couple of hypotheses. Firstly a person’s media use is largely reliant on their environment and access to different media mediums. Secondly, and more importantly, is that new media is interacted with in multiple ways at the same time. It is possible that in the future more and more forms of media will be accessible together.

Overall, when compared to the survey results of my peers, it can be seen that during the recorded period my relationship with journalism and communication was an unusual and stilted one. My reliance on modern media separated me from the norm and even then the fact I don’t use twitter, etc, or a smart phone meant that there was comparatively little media in my day to day life.