On the Media Podcast: Kidnapped

I listened to On the Media’s podcast: Kidnapped. The length of the podcast was about 51 minutes and aired on 22 April 2016.

Summary:

There is a high threat of kidnapping in the country of Syria. It has made it one of the most dangerous places in the world for journalists to go. In this podcast, we get to know how we get our news from a country that’s nearly impossible to visit and report on, and why the world’s policy on hostages means that some live to tell the tale, and others don’t.

Analysis:

They start off the very first part of the podcast telling the story of a reporter name John Cantlie. He was kidnapped in 2012, along with another reporter. One reporter was beheaded, and the other wasn’t. John Cantlie was the one who wasn’t. The media can twist the truth about his kidnapping and leave out important detail, which is why you have to be careful what you listen to, according to On the Media

While in captivity, ISIS used John Cantlie is propaganda. Some had thought he’d turned on them, but others know you can’t judge someone like that when they are in captivity. Cantlie had no help from the British government and was just doing what he could to survive. I feel like in this section of the podcast, On the Media is trying to use you’re emotion to tell a story.

John Cantlie is a seasoned professional when it comes to journalism. He has worked in some of the more dangerous countries.  They back up this claim by using the names of these countries.While he was in captivity, almost no one would say anything about him because they didn’t want to hasten his death. He’s been kidnapped twice now. So might say he’s the author of his own plight, but he knew the dangers, but choose to face them to be able to tell the story there.

On the Media Podcast: Ghosts

I listened to On the Media’s podcast: Ghosts. The length of the podcast was about 51 minutes and aired on 22 April 2016.

Summary:

Seventy-one years after the bombing the occurred, President Obama is the first president of the United States to visit Hiroshima. Because of this visit is has raised many questions that many are trying to avoid. In addition, On the Media revisits a well-known murder case that the press got wrong. They cover the long reach of the WWII slogan and the Ukraine’s attempt to whitewash their history. It is a special episode to revisit how we think—or in other words, our memory and how are personal as well as historical memory have an impact on us and how we shape the world we live in.

Analysis:

Obama going to Hiroshima is something is something he claims he is doing to create peace between the the countries. He says he will not apologize for the bombing of Hiroshima. However, people think that Obama is still implying an apology by going to Hiroshima. People claiming this is backed up by voice clips you hear on the podcast.

There is a general view that Obama has a tendency to say it’s always our fault when it comes to war. The general idea one of the speakers was presenting is that most Japanese aren’t expecting an apology. Japanese view the war as it being able to move forward. The story in America is that the bomb ended the war. It goes to show you how people remember the war effects history.

The speaker says when we take a look at the issue and ask ourselves if the bomb should have be dropped, the answer is yes and we should revisit it. Obama is drawing attention to an issue that is in the past and shouldn’t be revisited.

They bring up the interesting fact that younger people don’t know the facts of the war. Most of their knowledge comes from movies, not from textbooks. They have a different view than people back then.

Overall, they speakers use some many example to back up their ideas. On the Media is really good at quoting credible people through the use of voice overs.

On the Media Podcast: Trending Topics

I listened to On the Media’s podcast: Trending Topics. The length of the podcast was about 50 minutes and aired on 22 April 2016.

Summary:

This podcast goes into whether it is worse to have a set of rules that control what new you see or have human decide which news you see. There have accusations that Facebook’s Trending Topics really aren’t data driven, but are instead driven by the platforms power. On the Media uses multiple examples to help their audience reach their own conclusions about whether or not this claim is true and what Facebook’s motives could be. Facebook news could have more of an impact on us than we realize.

Analysis:

At the very begging of the podcast, the speaker uses the phrase: “Facebook got accused of journalism?” I believe by the speaker using this phrase he is trying to point of that while yes an accusation has been made about Facebook, there could still be something that we are not seeing. I love that he did that because it gets listeners to keep listening to what is being said throughout the podcast. They want to know if what Facebook is being accused of is true. I loved that the speaker did it in the form of a question too, as if to say that they are going to hopefully answer is.

They present things that make you think, such as what’s Facebook’s motive if this claim is true? On the Media uses credible source to back up this idea and claim. They have speakers on the show that is a journalist and one that’s a communication professor. Both study things related to this topic. On the Media’s guest speaker gives evidence by saying that documents were accidentally released about inserting specific news into Facebook feed. However, Facebook’s claims not to be a news site, but a platform that occasionally has business will people who want their news out there. Facebook could potentially be trying to cover their butts.

On the Media Podcast: On Shakespeare

I listened to On the Media’s podcast: On Shakespeare. The length of the podcast was about 50 minutes and aired on 22 April 2016.

Summary:

On the media tackles the topic of William Shakespeare. It has been 400 hundred years since his death, yet his work still remains intact and extremely well known. On the Media wants to know who Shakespeare truly is. They explore how the answer to the question has evolved through the ages. They take a look at what changes our perception of art, religion, class, and so forth. In addition, they take a look at one of Shakespeare’s works titled “Love’s Labor’s lost in Afghanistan” and look at its enduring global relevance that work has.

Analysis:

At the beginning of the podcast, the speaker references Starlings, which she then proceeds to talk about how it is a reference to Shakespeare. I believe she does this to set the tone for the podcast and let people know right off the bat that it is going to be about Shakespeare. At the beginning and end to while they are talking about Shakespeare they have this medieval music playing in the background—music that you would hear from the time of Shakespeare. I believe that was another tool used to help give the podcast a Shakespeare feel.

On the Media argues the right now is the perfect time to learn Shakespeare. They even start using Shakespeare’s phrases to describe why you should read his work. But On the Media chooses to go deeper into this topic of who Shakespeare is and uses the example of a popular phrase to help us understand that we can’t fully know. We have all heard: You have to live it to write it. It’s not true. You just have to have a good imagination, as they say in On the Media. They use example of some of the smartest people and say denied his Shakespeare authorship and argue that there is little documentary of him. We only know when he was born and things like marriage certificates. We don’t know his personal values through certificates Some people think that the works are Shakespeare’s works are an autobiography of his life. However, as they mentioned, your work doesn’t necessarily reflect who you are.

Overall, they bring in some good examples to back up their argument and claim.

On the Media Podcast: We Gotta Try Harder

I listened to On the Media’s podcast: We Gotta Try Harder. The length of the podcast was 50 minutes and aired on 1 April 2016.

Summary:

President Obama gave a speech in which he criticized journalistic irresponsibility. However, some critics say the he worked to block press access. On the Media takes a look at the unfortunate situation of public information under a puzzling administration. In addition, On the media went into discussing the ethics of reading news digging deeper into the idea of “momentum” when it comes to election season. In addition, they discuss a journalist who went undercover to fight for justice and about how he used every tool and disease at his disposal.

Analysis:

Throughout this podcast, On the Media goes deeper into this topic of the government saying they are being transparent but then denies press access to government documents. They use clips of President Obama saying thing like they are transparent or journalist are irresponsible to give them credibility when they say the president said these things.

I believe they are trying to make a point the the government is failing to meet the freedom of information act and want to know why. They have an investigative reporter can and talk about why the secrecy in the government might be. I feel like it gives them more claim as to what is going on. They make these compelling argument that I believe they use to get people to think about what’s happening. They argue that the government wants to stifle people we want to make it easier to access government records and information. They guest speaker believe that the government is afraid of certain conversations getting released. This reporter even said he’s received government papers talking about how they are trying to kill freedom of information. I like that he doesn’t just say papers, but says 1000’s of papers. I feel as if he uses it as a tool to say he’s got plenty of information on it.

Media Observation 24: Old Navy’s “First Day of School”

I love this commercial. The situation the kid is in is one I am sure a lot of kids could relate to. I like it not only because it is relatable, but I feel like parents fear they are going to be that parent that embarrasses their kid. Old Navy is trying to get across the message that if you buy clothes at their store, your kid doesn’t have to be embarrassed.

Another message they are sending is that parents don’t know what style of clothing is “hip.” Kids know what they like and kids like old navy clothes, so therefore you should buy all your kids clothes there. If you do, your child will fit in at school.

In the commercial, when the mom asks how much the clothing was, she responded with shock when they told her how much the clothing cost. Old Navy is trying to say that they have good deals on clothing. By the mom being surprised, it sends the message that even a parent (who can clearly afford more) thinks that’s a good deal!

Overall, this commercial was well done and got their message across clearly, while still having a bit of humor to it.

 

Media Observation 23: K-mart’s “Ship My Pants”

This commercial is one that is meant to be funny. It using play on words to sound like they are saying something completely different. K-mart is advertising that you can have stuff from the store shipped to you house. Humor is sometimes the best things to use and I think they did a good job of it here. Because they used humor, people will watch it, laugh, and then show those around them the video. People will then continue and continue to share the video, resulting in more free advertising for K-mart.

I loved that they used a variety of people. They used black, white, old, and young people. I believe they are trying to send this message that they are a family oriented store for people of all ages. That’s what they had the family in the commercial too.

I like that it showed the family at the end of the commercial hugging the employee. I feel as if it serves the purpose of saying that k-mart’s employees are extremely helpful and you will love them so much, you will want to give them a hug. The way that the family was asking questions about the pants and the employee being able to answer goes to show you that their employees know things about the products and can help you same money.