Reality TV

mitch, you should ask john fink about his view on reality tv when he visits. reality tv has a cathartic effect in part because it's (re)constructed that way. to have a beginning, middle and end. to have a climax. to have cliff hangers.

the events are planned and videotaped for maximum drama, sexuality, excitement, etc., then in the editing phase, these strategic situations are further honed into drama, into compelling or titillating narratives, etc. pete

Genre Consideration

consider genre in the context of our evolving electronic media environment. the uarc issue ties in obliquely with questions over genre. genre is not contained by corporate or institutional boundaries. the war film/tv show genre is well-established. it's classical phase was during the war years 1941-1945, when the government and hollywood unified in an overarching nationalist mission that still reverberates in todays market. a level of sophistication has been reached that allows for state projects/product to compete in the marketplace of info and entertainment with strictly entertainment-oriented product. ethical and moral boundaries blur.

in relation to the thomas schatz chapter on genre, consider what kinds of impacts the global marketplace, diaspora, transnational media corporations, ethnicity, consumer age, narrative or game expectations, globalization, venues and platforms, technological capablities or limitations, etc. have on how genres survive, morph, evolve, converge, synergize, etc?

for example, in the 21st century we've seen the rise of the first person shooter video game capture a significant share of the market. it has a paramilitary focus, even when the only things being shot up are monsters and aliens. is this because this kind of activity is more kinetically engaging, easier to construct with point and click technologies, satisfies some deep primal need in human kind, etc?

UARC: Uncomfortable at any scale.

I think ethics necessarily plays in any discussion about developing weapons systems. It necessarily plays a part when the government uses its authority to classify information. And I think it plays a part when you are considering blurring the goals of two organizations as important as education and the military.

I can understand the desire for the DoD to want to improve its ability to do its job, but I have to agree with opponents when they worry about the effects such research will have when it's placed in our public university. Furthermore, I'm personally uncomfortable with the amount to which military ends are driving America's economy and foreign policy. I don't think that we should be spending more time researching with towards such ends. I don't think that the current balance is right in America when it comes to violence as opposed to other means of affecting change. America is and has been in the arms business for many years now, but we are also a world power that is called upon to act as an important mediator of conflicts on the international scale.

The UARC is a part of that mechanism that drives us as a nation to engage the world with weapons instead of diplomacy, and that should be looked at as well. This is happening at a personal scale because it's happening at my University, but it's also happening at the largest human scale that's imaginable, and I'm not comfortable with it at either one.