Time is ticking, but are you keeping up?

Have you ever felt that there is not enough time in your day to do everything that you want do? Have you ever wished that there were more hours in a day, perhaps 28 as opposed to 24? Ask your parents if they ever felt this way when they were your age. I'd bet that they would say no.

Time passes whether we are keeping track of it or not. We know that in the morning the sun comes up, and at night then sun goes down. Thus we have established days, and throughout history have broken them down into weeks, months and years. If humans have been keeping track of time for milleniums, why is it that our race suddenly feels that they are lacking time? It is because we belong to a fast-paced culture in which everyday media distractions are unavoidable. If you wake up in the morning to the sound of an alarm clock, you are being mediated. By dressing for court in a brand new business suit, you are being mediated.

Technology is largely to blame for our lack of time as well. Going back to my comment on our parents' past, the previous generation did not rely on television, telephones or computers to get by in their day. The global village that we make daily contributions to today had not yet been established.

On Wednesday, I wake up at 8:30 sharp. My routine consists of showering, using the washroom, eating, brushing my teeth, getting changed, and getting into my car to drive to school. I know that by waking up at a specific time I will, in turn, arrive at school at a certain time. Everyone in my first class will know if I am not on time if I have arrived to school at 10:00 instead of 9:55. This routine that I, and so many others practice on a daily basis would not be possible without time. Not only has the influence of time shaped daily human routines, but it has also structured modern day society. We use time to be able to watch our favourite television shows, to plan meal arrangements and most importantly, to get to class ON TIME.

We have discovered yet another vital medium that structures our lives in the 21st century, and as Mass Communication continues, I'm getting the feeling that this is just the beginning.

Iconography: media theory at work

If it wasn't for Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics, the Invisible Art, I may still be living in a conceptual world.

Stay tuned to discover what exactly that means! In the meantime, what I will say is that - in my own life - symbolism and other visual representations of inatimate objects would be overlooked if this book hadn't helped me to understand them. Take for instance McCloud's first example of the pipe, or the painting of the pipe; it was actually the drawing of the painting of the pipe. McCloud's animated, self-representation from the book helped to explain the "strange and wonderful world of the icon" (McCloud 24-26), that a flag is not a country, that drawn flowers and animals are not flowers and animals (1).

These are all examples that we deal with as humans every day, and when encountering these symbols in our lives it is natural to just accept them. We are therefore accepting them as something that they are really not. Our minds see the drawing of the painting of the pipe and classify it as a solid object, and when seeing flags we associtate them to countries. This is media at work.

To avoid some generalization, we can observe Marshall McLuhan, who once said that "media are extensions" of our human senses, and that "the medium is the message" (McLuhan). When we look at drawings (a medium) of animals or flowers and associate them immediately to a concrete object, the medium has worked its way into our senses to provide a quick reaction of the experience. Our eyes see a flower, but can we feel the flower? Can we smell the flower? It is media at work that has deceived our senses to create a false sense of reality (2). Therefore we can distinguish between what is 'real' and what is not, but only when we closely examine a situation as opposed to just accepting it.

McCloud gives credit to McLuhan for being one of the first individuals to establish the intense effects of media on the human race. McCloud expands on his explanation of icons, and separates them into two realms: the realm of the concept, and the realm of the senses. Objects of the conceptual world cannot be seen, touched, heard, etc. Thus we can place cartoons and symbols into this grouping. As we would examine it in reality, the drawing of the painting of the pipe is not actually a pipe because it applies only to the sense of sight. Meanwhile, the realm of the senses consists of things we can feel, smell, see, hear and taste. If we examined a pipe in reality, we would be able to taste it, smell it, feel it in our hands, and so on (3).

Both McCloud's and McLuhan's mind work in similar ways, and connections can be drawn between the two. Both agree on the effects media take on humans, whether we are watching television advertisements or distinguishing between the conceptual world and the 'real'. In today's world, the conceptual world has both entered and toyed with the world of the senses, as proven in McLoud's example of the pipe. It is our responsibility as media-stricken human beings to actively determine between the two; to wake up and smell the roses... literally.

Works Cited

1. McCloud, Scott. Understanding Comics, the Invisible Art. New York: HarperCollins Inc., 1993.

2. "The Playboy Interview: Marshall McLuhan.". Mar 1969. 6 Oct 2008.

3. Scott McCloud: Ibid.

Image coutesy of Google Images

Mass media in our 'global village'

Media surrounds us, but mass media is only made possible through technology, such as the Internet and television. It involves certain media that is shown through new technologies and then absorbed by society (the masses).

In contrast to half a century ago, humans in the 21st century have access to unlimited amounts of information. We have discussed it many timesin class: the Internet has changed the world forever. In 1935, long before the Internet and just as the television was making into its way into society, Walter Benjamin wrote, "When the age of mechanical reproduction separated art from its basis in cult, the semblance of its autonomy disappeared forever. The resulting change in the function of art transcended the perspective of the century" (1). What mechanical reproduction has done is take away the aura of an original artwork. Ian made a point in class by looking at the many ways the Mona Lisa can be transformed online, even to the point when it can be reproduced by using a computer paint program. Going to see the Mona Lisa first hand used to be an experience, knowing that what you are witnessing is the only one like it in the world. Today, Da Vinci's masterpiece is known by millions of people worldwide, and of those millions of people perhaps 10% of them actually saw the Mona Lisa in the Louvre. This is the ruthless feat of mass media.

Thirty-odd years later, Marshall McLuhan coined a term that defines civilization in the 21st century: the "global village". He explains it in his 1969 interview with Playboy magazine:

"But the basic thing to remember about the electric media is that they inexorably transform every sense ratio and thus recondition and restructure all our values and institutions. The overhauling of our traditional political system is only one manifestation of the retribalizing process wrought by the electric media, which is turning the planet into a global village" (2).

We are all connected in today's society; McLuhan knew it then, and we know it now. To send information from Canada to China it takes mere seconds, whether it be via email or instant messaging. Postage? Envelopes? Are we still speaking the same language? The "Global Village" is the language of the 21st century, a networked global community filled with information, and surrounded by mass media.

Works Cited

1. Benjamin, Walter. "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction."1935. http://academic.evergreen.edu/a/arunc/compmusic/benjamin/benjamin.pdf

2. "The Playboy Interview: Marshall McLuhan.". Mar 1969. 5 Oct 2008. http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~gisle/links/mcluhan/pb.html.

Do you buy it?

"Yes".

If it was solely this word up on a billboard it would be ineffective, but there's more to this advertisement than just a word. There is a picture which induces, and a logo which convinces, which makes people say, "yes... I'll buy that".

Coca-Cola was founded in 1886, and since then has grown into one of the largest corporations in the world. Its logo is one of the most commonly recognized symbols in the world, second (probably) only to McDonald's. How is it that Coke has become such a huge and successful company? Advertising.

Let's look at this ad: a woman, a word, a logo, and most importantly, a fresh bottle of Coca-Cola. The most prominant figure in this ad is the woman. She lies there, legs perfectly straight, exposed and free in the sunlight with a smile that both teases and claims innocence. Her hands are flat behind her and her blonde hair is flowing. Being offered to her: a bottle of Coca-Cola, because this blonde beauty would love nothing more than a Coke on this hot, summer day.

Roland Barthes distinguished between the signifier (a sign) and the signified (what the sign represents) in his book, Mythologies. What we plainly see is the signifier. In this case we see the woman, we see "yes", and we see the bottle of Coke. However, the signifier is not what makes the ad effective; It's not what makes millions of people worldwide choose to buy Coke at their local grocery store. It is the signified, or what the images represent that creates value within the ad and conveys what a symbol stands for (1). The woman represents beauty, a seductive being that will convince the consumer that the most beautiful people love to refresh themselves by drinking Coke. Her enticing pose is topped off with "yes", conveying the message that this moment could not be any more perfect.

Advertisements all follow the same structure, with the ultimate goal being to SELL A PRODUCT, something that the experts at Coca-Cola have been doing effectively for years. Barthes myth-related ideology surrounding the sign, signifier and signified should be taken into consideration when looking at ads. They require more observation than just that of the signifier; it is the signified that helps to explain what the signifier represents. Is this just a Coca-Cola ad? No, it's a complex and structured series of symbols designed to sell.

Do you buy it?

Works Cited

1. Barthes, Roland. Mythologies. New York: Hill and Wang, 1972.

Image courtesy of Google Images.