Feminist International Radio Endeavor
Our alternative media source is Feminist International Radio Endeavor (FIRE), which is an Internet grassroots feminist radio located in Costa Rica. This radio broadcast originally began in May 1991 as a short wave radio broadcast. Then in May 1998 they converted their radio broadcasts to the Internet. Despite their title, their main focus is not just about women’s rights, but also about raising women’s voices and perspectives on current events. This also gives women a stronger presence in the media. FIRE is directed towards women and focuses on minorities throughout the world. As a result, FIRE can appeal to a global audience not just woman. However while this can appeal to a global audience, the demographic can be fairly concentrated towards Spanish speakers since many of the articles/broadcasts are in that language.
Feminist International Radio Endeavor
Our alternative media source is Feminist International Radio Endeavor (FIRE), which is an Internet grassroots feminist radio based in Costa Rica. This radio broadcast originally began in May 1991 as a short wave radio broadcast. Then in May 1998 they converted their radio broadcasts to the Internet. Despite their title, their main focus is not just about women’s rights, but also more about raising women’s voices and perspectives on current events. This also gives women a stronger presence in the media. FIRE is directed towards women but also focuses on minorities throughout the world. As a result, FIRE can appeal to a global audience not just woman. However while this can appeal to a global audience, the demographic can be fairly concentrated towards Spanish speakers since many of the articles/broadcasts are in that language.
For my research assignment I will be comparing FIRE or Feminist International Radio Endeavor to other a network news radio program such as Fox or CBS news. The first type of research that would be relevant to FIRE would be to gather some quantitative research regarding the background of FIRE, what type of people listen to this radio station and how effective it is at getting the message across. I would also like to know how many people and what type of people listen to this station. This information would help me branch off into comparing how each network connects to their audience and how their audience receives the meaning or idea.
Even though the quantitative research is very accessible it would not give my partner and I the necessary information to achieve a valuable comparison of the two stations and how they interact with society. Quantitative research is more useful in this instance. I can use interviews and articles regarding FIRE and the other mainstream sources to compare the two and achieve an educated argument regarding the two broadcasts.
From this approach I want to be able to find how each broadcast presents their point of view and what evidence they have. I also want to find where their proof comes from and if the alternative source does not have as reliable sources as the mainstream source. The presentation of the content will be a great point of interest for me. FIRE, I would assume, seems more radical and very alternative then CBS or Fox. So I can only assume that they are going to have a much more intense frame and idea that they want to get across to their audience. I also assume that FIRE’s audience is much smaller and limited in demographic thus, it can focus more on its own point of view and get the idea across much faster to a smaller amount of people. While on the other hand I want to compare the more “neutral” frames that mainstream radio has because they want to attract a larger audience.
I thought that this was one of the stronger wikis on the site. This is because at first glance this Wiki is well organized, visually appealing and overall easy to read. The information was distributed very well throughout the site and the images and outside sources did not overwhelm the actual information.
The first thing that caught my attention and kept me reading was that the history first gave a brief description of how the company was started, who owns it and gave facts that appear within this section. Then to reinforce the information they made a timeline to visually show how the company progressed, to where it is now and how it got there. Some of the information within the history section, such as the apps that were created, I thought became a little redundant and maybe even a little pointless but overall it gave a very good in depth overview. The graph in “How it works” was a little confusing and never explained but it gave a variety to the site. Under this the description showed a huge understanding of how the Android works and the inner workings of the technology. The hyperlinks also caught my eye and showed once again a greater understanding of the technology needed.
This Wiki gave in depth information and made it interesting to read. The videos and images helped reinforce the text while not distracting from it. I wish there was more information about the phone service that the Android worked for since that is a factor in the Androids future besides just the regular functions and applications. This Wiki was well organized and relevant which made this have a stronger argument than the others.
I believe that the government should not exercise restraint on blocking certain negative media information regarding events that have taken place in our country. I believe that first of all, the country is not unified enough to have a standard of what is right and what is wrong. Our government should not be the one giving us (as the people) these opinions.
Since the events of 9/11 there has been much debate on what material should be let loose on the web. There have been many conspiracy theories that suggest that the U.S. Government was actually involved. These sources could be present under “Clear and Present Danger” laws. Or under the precedent of “NYT vs. US Government” over the Pentagon papers. The government did not want the information about the U.S. involvement in Vietnam to be released under the fact that is posed cleared and present danger to the people of the United States by threatening national security. But I do not see how these papers threatened the citizens. I believe that the government was afraid of losing power over the people and wanted to hide behind these laws. This is not just! I believe that revoking the information is a threat to national security!
I would say that the restraint the government has on the press is already too much. The United States is a Democracy and the press needs to be seen as a form of check and balance of the government’s power. If this country is truly a Democracy then the people need to be able to see all the information and the government needs to be able to provide credible information to combat these ideas if they prove to be incorrect. This way there should be no Prior Restraint law, unless during wartime when the information could be used by a foreign enemy against the country. Examples are, weapons, strategic plans, or any other wartime data.
Prior Restraint laws also should function under this idea. To strengthen the press in the U.S., Shield laws need to be made federal instead of just in every state. This law gives the press freedom to write accurate, controversial, diverse pieces of journalism without fear of the government. This would serve to the governments benefit because then they would have to strive to produce correct and accessible information to the public. Thus the public would be receiving a higher quality of data both from their own government, who now has to abide by democratic values for fear of the press releasing panic, and from private sources, such as news companies. This would make our country stronger in both the government in the people themselves.
Dexter Morgan is a blood splatter analysis at the Miami PD. He is also a serial killer who kills only other killers. He does this by a code of ethics that his foster father has instilled onto him to make him a killing machine. The subtext of this show revolves around what is right and wrong in society. Is it wrong to kill others who have done wrong? It also questions the effectiveness of the police department and the judicial system by consistently letting killers walk free and having the police department fail at catching them. Mostly the subtext revolves around having viewers question their authority figures and to possibly take things into their own hands.
This television show has been featured in the New York Daily News, San Francisco Chronicle, Chicago Sun-times and People weekly. The reruns began in 2008 on CBS, which totaled the audience to 2.6 million viewers. This show has been nominated for multiple awards such as the Golden Globe. The music is fairly neutral consisting of harmonics with many sting instruments to create tension and darkness surrounding Dexter’s actions. When the cityscape of Miami is shown there is usually rich Latino music playing to give a sense of the culture and the difference between Miami and Dexter’s own life. The genre is a drama or a dark drama. On some websites it is even seen as a psychodrama because of the inner conflict of the characters. The point of view is from Dexter and from an outside source that follows other characters. There are times when the audience knows more than Dexter does and when you know more than the other characters. Audiences expect a lot of blood and intense tension within this show. The online environment such as Metacritic.com has given consistently high ratings and has asked to continue the show.
Audiences are reacting differently to this show then I have seen with others. While the following for this show is very strong the content of the show has had dangerous events following it. There have been murders and killings that revolve around the show Dexter, and the police have been saying that there has been idolization of Dexter. This show might be portraying a different subtext; it is making serial killers more human, emotion and almost acceptable.
8 am- woke up and got online to check the weather
9am- went to class
10-4- i was sick all that day so i stayed in bed texted friends and watched movies on netflix
texted throughout the night and slept
10- I got online to ebay and ordered a type writer after purchasing the type writer i used the internet to find out how to replace the ribbon and see how it works
11-went to boulder to work with the horses and listened to my ipod on the way there
2- texted and called friends to make plans
3- I hung out with many friends but was texting others to make plans through the night and to see how everyone was doing
4-10 and after while hanging out with friends my texting creases until i got home
I woke up to a ton a snow and preceded to watch more movies on the internet
I did this throughout the day and texted friends
I spent most of the day online
9pm- started homework. I used the computer to get some work done but while doing homework i had a tab that was always open to facebook and was chatting with friends while doing my work. I also had my phone by my side and was texting people while doing homework and chatting.
woke up to a non snow day 😦 I used weather.com to check the temperature
9-4 went to class where i did text a bit in class but rarely and did not use my computer
6-9 I had dance class where i did not text but used my ipod to play music and dance to with the class.
10-12 got on facebook when i got back to the dorms and then used the computer to post my blog, i did have a facebook tab open and my phone at my side.
Reflection: I feel that I have a fairly good balance between technology and interacting face-to-face with people. I try to stop texting when I am with people unless I am making plans for later that night. I used my computer more for entertainment value instead of for work and school. This weekend was unusual because I got sick and because of the snow, i spent more time watching movies than interacting with my friends. I was surprised at how much I use technology, I write all my poetry and free writes on the computer (which will change when i receive my type writer) I also use it to talk more with friends then I would if I was with them. Through this medium I have kept in touch with friends from all over the country at one time while conversing with someone in my room. At times I do feel a sense of detachment from reality because of how tied I am to my phone and to Facebook.