I just wanted to write a brief update on how our business page is doing! I have to admit, I haven't been doing as much with it as I was wanting but I'm going to step it up! So when I gave the presentation in class, I think the page was at 500 likes or maybe 504, something close to that. In the past few weeks, we have gained 50 new followers which isn't really a lot but comparatively speaking of his page as a whole, that's the most growth we have seen for a long time! I've been looking into the metrics of the page to find out when the best time to post is, who is liking our posts, which posts were the most popular, ect. I also posted a photo of Dustin and our daughter on the page and it got a very positive response!
I have also been trying to look at other videographers fb pages to see what they are doing, how often they post and what's working for them. Of course, I'm not trying to say that I want to copy what everyone is doing but I do think it is helpful to look at other sources and figure out what's going to work and be successful for you personally. I noticed that some people post twice a day or every day, I think right now for our audience and content, that is too much. I'm wanting to start out at posting every other day and maybe build off from there rather than going from posting once a week or every two weeks to suddenly bombarding people! In addition to me taking over the Facebook page, my husband has been revamping his Instagram as well to make it more presentable and easy to look at. This will also help cross promote between the two pages if they are consistent with one another.
I am still trying to figure out how to get people to actually click like on the videos. I shared one yesterday around noon which was supposedly a peak time and included a question of "what do you think?" and "if you love it, share it with your friends!" and it got 4 likes, FOUR. And one of those was my personal account, ugh. I know it's silly to get frustrated about a "like" in a virtual world where it really doesn't mean anything, but I guess when it's your (meaning my husband's) art, passion, and livelihood; it does sting a little. It's okay though, just have to brush it off and keep trying and maybe after a while or after this project, we will conclude that FB just isn't for us and maybe it just doesn't work for this type of business. There are lots of outlets to advertise and share your work with the world, it's just about finding where you fit in! Heading back to the think tank!
Saturday, February 27, 2016
Monday, February 22, 2016
Religion 3.0 Well Informed Post
Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Choice?
For my well informed post this week, I wanted to explore whether or not our First Amendment right to freedom of religion is being threatened. I am not discussing a single religion or the one I affiliate with rather all religion as a whole (and those who choose not to participate in religion). Before I begin this post, I personally don't feel like our freedom of religion is being threatened. If anyone truly believes it is needs to try living in most of the Middle East or North Korea. In the United States we are absolutely free to practice what we choose (as long as you aren't killing people or breaking the law). That being said, I think the better question to ask is how is tolerance changing when it comes to religion? It's clear for the most part that the government couldn't care less what you do or don't believe in, but what about the general culture or society? It seems on both sides it's getting more intolerant; religious people want everyone else to be religious and less or non-religious people want everyone to stop judging them and stop being.. what's the word? a bigot. Why can't both sides actually "do what they preach?"
I found this interesting website where you can have a clear and organized debate with others so I looked up this topic to see what people were saying. I really liked what this person said, "But the message from many places in the United States is that religions and religious people are to be silent. Religions and religious people deserve the right to be able to voice their beliefs in the public sphere without fear that they will lose their employment, home, or emotional well-being. The government has a duty to protect religious thought and not favor any religion or lack of religion. A secular state forces religious beliefs to be hidden, which goes against many religious beliefs which require its practitioners to be vocal and public about their beliefs..." Another more generalized statement I relate to was this, "Believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and you're intolerant. If you believe life begins at conception, you hate women. The people who are supposedly the most tolerant are actually the least." Being a religious (although not extreme or devout) person myself, I find these statements to be very true. If I speak out the tiniest statement on social media about a belief I have or why I support/don't support something, I am usually torn apart and personally attacked. Which is why I don't say anything anymore which I think is troubling that so many religious people feel like they can't speak up for fear of retaliation rather than a civil discussion or debate that would perhaps end with "let's agree to disagree but still be kind to one another."
On the other side of the debate we have those who feel they are suffocating under religion whether it's pressure put on by their parents or the community or church leaders. They feel like they are being watched until they make a mistake and then be scolded for it. I found this quote that sheds light on the other side of this, "Religion hasn't simply been fair to everybody. When you've been treated unfairly it's natural to feel anger or hate towards that institution. For an average white christian male he might see the unfairness in religion but he hasn't been treated unfairly. When he might criticize religion for this unfairness a homosexual person may feel angry for being called a sinner. Similarly in Islam there's a lot of reason why women and homosexuals could feel hatred towards religion. In Hindu religion there exists still untouchability based on caste in many parts of India. They've been treated unfairly for centuries. I don't endorse anger or hatred towards religion. But unfair treatment almost always begets anger and hatred. They're hatred is justified." I can completely understand this viewpoint and see why some individuals do develop a mistrust and possibly hatred towards religious institutions or even religious people. I too have experienced feelings of judgement, rebellion, and non acceptance in some levels in my religion however I have also felt these things many more times outside of my religion as well. I'm starting to wonder that it's not people becoming more unsupportive and critical of whether you are religious or not, rather it's people becoming more unsupportive and critical of each other. "But American society is more focused on individual freedom, and less focused on social rules than it used to be." (psychologytoday)
Generally speaking, society especially the millennial generation (which I realize I'm a part of) is very much an "I and me" generation. What do I want to do? What will make me happy? Why should I care? I deserve this.. I want that. This way of thinking leaks toxin into our conversations turning a simple difference of thought into "You don't agree with me so I hate you." This realization makes Human Communication majors like myself very troubled and depressed. I feel like I am getting a degree in a lost cause because we seem to no longer be communicating with each other as humans but rather fighting with each other like neanderthals. I slightly digress, this applies to religion in the sense that we continually put people into categories and little boxes of what we assume they are or what we think fits them best. We then can easily make conclusions in our heads that "all Christians are judgmental bigots." "All Atheists are satanists." "All Muslims are terrorists." I think most would agree these categories are wrong and totally uncalled for and uneducated. Yet why do some think this way? Why is it so easy to get a negative reaction when you hear certain affiliations? Why is it when someone has a bad experience (or several) with a religion or a religious person that they denote the whole religion as terrible and in turn it's affiliates? Let's be realistic, every religion is going to have a handful of radicals, a ton of hypocrites, and even more unfriendly "judgmental" members. And because of those few (in the grand scheme) are that way, every other member doesn't get a chance?
Going back to the human aspect, no one can hope to be all accepting, pure loving, and positive every moment of every day. What we can do is stop stereotyping, categorizing, and being critical of everyone all the time. If someone is religious and wants to share their love of God with you, don't see it as them "forcing it down your throat" say no thanks and move on and hopefully *most* religious people will move on as well. And if you're religious friend doesn't believe in drinking alcohol, don't try to tell her that's a stupid and dated belief and try to get her to break it; support her by not making her feel bad about it. If someone believes marriage is between a man and a woman, instead of personally attacking them and saying their religion is evil and must change, try saying "I don't understand that belief and I don't agree but let's move on." Of course, on the other side if someone doesn't want to come to church after you've asked them every Sunday for the past 6 months, please move on and simply pray for them if it worries you so much. Also, if someone has tattoos and/or a baby with his girlfriend and comes to church, don't stare them down and avoid them at all cost, maybe say hello what's your name? I'm so glad you are here and actually mean it. If you're son decides not to go on a mission or become a priest and if your daughter makes a mistake or choice to have premarital sex; don't make them feel worthless, don't kick them out, don't give them the silent treatment. LOVE THEM. It's your child and you are the one person they should be able to count on to pick them up when they have fallen down. Sorry I went a little far with that because I am a parent and it hurts me to see how parents react when their children choose differently than they were "supposed" to.
I've stressed my point enough I think so I'll briefly conclude. Our freedom of religion is still safe and sound as far as I'm concerned however the pressure from an individualistic society is making it harder to believe what you want and be able to voice that without scrutiny. In the same respect, Institutional pressure is making it harder to make your own choices and set your own path without punishment. Everyone wants to be right and no one wants to be wrong.
For my well informed post this week, I wanted to explore whether or not our First Amendment right to freedom of religion is being threatened. I am not discussing a single religion or the one I affiliate with rather all religion as a whole (and those who choose not to participate in religion). Before I begin this post, I personally don't feel like our freedom of religion is being threatened. If anyone truly believes it is needs to try living in most of the Middle East or North Korea. In the United States we are absolutely free to practice what we choose (as long as you aren't killing people or breaking the law). That being said, I think the better question to ask is how is tolerance changing when it comes to religion? It's clear for the most part that the government couldn't care less what you do or don't believe in, but what about the general culture or society? It seems on both sides it's getting more intolerant; religious people want everyone else to be religious and less or non-religious people want everyone to stop judging them and stop being.. what's the word? a bigot. Why can't both sides actually "do what they preach?"
I found this interesting website where you can have a clear and organized debate with others so I looked up this topic to see what people were saying. I really liked what this person said, "But the message from many places in the United States is that religions and religious people are to be silent. Religions and religious people deserve the right to be able to voice their beliefs in the public sphere without fear that they will lose their employment, home, or emotional well-being. The government has a duty to protect religious thought and not favor any religion or lack of religion. A secular state forces religious beliefs to be hidden, which goes against many religious beliefs which require its practitioners to be vocal and public about their beliefs..." Another more generalized statement I relate to was this, "Believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and you're intolerant. If you believe life begins at conception, you hate women. The people who are supposedly the most tolerant are actually the least." Being a religious (although not extreme or devout) person myself, I find these statements to be very true. If I speak out the tiniest statement on social media about a belief I have or why I support/don't support something, I am usually torn apart and personally attacked. Which is why I don't say anything anymore which I think is troubling that so many religious people feel like they can't speak up for fear of retaliation rather than a civil discussion or debate that would perhaps end with "let's agree to disagree but still be kind to one another."
On the other side of the debate we have those who feel they are suffocating under religion whether it's pressure put on by their parents or the community or church leaders. They feel like they are being watched until they make a mistake and then be scolded for it. I found this quote that sheds light on the other side of this, "Religion hasn't simply been fair to everybody. When you've been treated unfairly it's natural to feel anger or hate towards that institution. For an average white christian male he might see the unfairness in religion but he hasn't been treated unfairly. When he might criticize religion for this unfairness a homosexual person may feel angry for being called a sinner. Similarly in Islam there's a lot of reason why women and homosexuals could feel hatred towards religion. In Hindu religion there exists still untouchability based on caste in many parts of India. They've been treated unfairly for centuries. I don't endorse anger or hatred towards religion. But unfair treatment almost always begets anger and hatred. They're hatred is justified." I can completely understand this viewpoint and see why some individuals do develop a mistrust and possibly hatred towards religious institutions or even religious people. I too have experienced feelings of judgement, rebellion, and non acceptance in some levels in my religion however I have also felt these things many more times outside of my religion as well. I'm starting to wonder that it's not people becoming more unsupportive and critical of whether you are religious or not, rather it's people becoming more unsupportive and critical of each other. "But American society is more focused on individual freedom, and less focused on social rules than it used to be." (psychologytoday)
Generally speaking, society especially the millennial generation (which I realize I'm a part of) is very much an "I and me" generation. What do I want to do? What will make me happy? Why should I care? I deserve this.. I want that. This way of thinking leaks toxin into our conversations turning a simple difference of thought into "You don't agree with me so I hate you." This realization makes Human Communication majors like myself very troubled and depressed. I feel like I am getting a degree in a lost cause because we seem to no longer be communicating with each other as humans but rather fighting with each other like neanderthals. I slightly digress, this applies to religion in the sense that we continually put people into categories and little boxes of what we assume they are or what we think fits them best. We then can easily make conclusions in our heads that "all Christians are judgmental bigots." "All Atheists are satanists." "All Muslims are terrorists." I think most would agree these categories are wrong and totally uncalled for and uneducated. Yet why do some think this way? Why is it so easy to get a negative reaction when you hear certain affiliations? Why is it when someone has a bad experience (or several) with a religion or a religious person that they denote the whole religion as terrible and in turn it's affiliates? Let's be realistic, every religion is going to have a handful of radicals, a ton of hypocrites, and even more unfriendly "judgmental" members. And because of those few (in the grand scheme) are that way, every other member doesn't get a chance?
Going back to the human aspect, no one can hope to be all accepting, pure loving, and positive every moment of every day. What we can do is stop stereotyping, categorizing, and being critical of everyone all the time. If someone is religious and wants to share their love of God with you, don't see it as them "forcing it down your throat" say no thanks and move on and hopefully *most* religious people will move on as well. And if you're religious friend doesn't believe in drinking alcohol, don't try to tell her that's a stupid and dated belief and try to get her to break it; support her by not making her feel bad about it. If someone believes marriage is between a man and a woman, instead of personally attacking them and saying their religion is evil and must change, try saying "I don't understand that belief and I don't agree but let's move on." Of course, on the other side if someone doesn't want to come to church after you've asked them every Sunday for the past 6 months, please move on and simply pray for them if it worries you so much. Also, if someone has tattoos and/or a baby with his girlfriend and comes to church, don't stare them down and avoid them at all cost, maybe say hello what's your name? I'm so glad you are here and actually mean it. If you're son decides not to go on a mission or become a priest and if your daughter makes a mistake or choice to have premarital sex; don't make them feel worthless, don't kick them out, don't give them the silent treatment. LOVE THEM. It's your child and you are the one person they should be able to count on to pick them up when they have fallen down. Sorry I went a little far with that because I am a parent and it hurts me to see how parents react when their children choose differently than they were "supposed" to.
I've stressed my point enough I think so I'll briefly conclude. Our freedom of religion is still safe and sound as far as I'm concerned however the pressure from an individualistic society is making it harder to believe what you want and be able to voice that without scrutiny. In the same respect, Institutional pressure is making it harder to make your own choices and set your own path without punishment. Everyone wants to be right and no one wants to be wrong.
Wednesday, February 17, 2016
On The Media #2
What is the Zika virus and should we be worried?
Once again, this assignment is showing how much I really don't watch the news or keep up with a lot of current events because I have not heard a single thing about this virus or the word Zika for that matter. Usually 'On The Media' has various stories on their weekly show, however clearly this topic is very important because it is the single topic covered in this weeks show. This virus covers a lot of areas of interest and rather than zone in on just one of the 5-7 minute excerpts, I chose to look at all of them to get a good grasp of this virus and what is being done about it.
I first wanted to explore "the Zika poster child" because I believe it taps into both a psychological and social context. In the interview with Patricia Mello, who is a writer for the major newspaper in Brazil; she discusses how the country didn't really react to this virus or do much about it until it started to affect newborns. The same trend followed with the general public, through not necessarily losing sleep over this virus until they started seeing these photos of the affected infants. Why do we do this with media? Why do we not care about something until it hits a little part in our heart, much like the viral photo of the deceased boy on the beach? I think that it's become this way partly because of social trends. Print media no longer reaches the mass public and therefore doesn't get much thought. A photo however gets liked, shared, posted, blogged and spreads like wildfire. A photo metaphorically is worth a thousand words and each person relates to it differently. The photo of this child affected by the Zika Virus is a social aspect because it turned this virus from a public problem to a community problem.
The other reason we react to photos like this and consequently decide to finally take action is also a psychological one. One of the most effective ways to persuade someone is through pathos (or emotion). Simply telling someone, "hey there is a very harmful Zika virus going around, we really should take action to combat this" isn't as effective as showing a picture or video of a woman holding her infected baby and crying. Our brains like connections and concepts to build relationships of things that we can use when certain stimuli presents itself. So when we see a photo or video (especially of children) trying to promote something, chances are we will listen and act. We do this because we can relate to that, whether it's on a human basis, a parent basis, love basis ect.
I also listened to the podcast of Brooke Gladstone interviewing Jonathan Katz, a reporter who caught the Zika virus, however not the associated panic. I laughed a few times while listening to this because he was so blunt and realistic about it all. I like that he wasn't trying to say that this Virus isn't something that needs to be addressed but he thinks it doesn't do any good for the media to just scare people. This is a major cultural issue especially in the United States. The media always seems to exasperate issues and people get concerned and worked up over something they know very little about. I like that Ebola was also brought up and the few "moments of fame" it got and now this Zika virus is breaking news. I agree with Jonathan in that we don't need to panic about the Zika virus, we need to educate ourselves on what it is and take the necessary steps to prevent it.
I think this is a hard issue to have a "stand" on because it's not like I can really choose to support or believe in the virus ha ha. It really helped tuning into this weeks show and educating myself on what this virus is and how it may or may not affect me. I really think there is a problem with people listening to the news or following social media on a matter and taking it face value. It's easy for people to say "oh this is global crisis! I am never leaving my house again!" On the other side it is easy to claim that it's not an issue, it doesn't affect me. I myself, found myself saying, "well just kill off all the mosquitos, problem solved!" According to the interview with Nikos Vasilakis, it isn't that easy. I think the biggest concern now is the virus slowly making its way to the United States and of course the devastating effects it is having on infants. I believe these are very valid concerns and ones that definitely need to be addressed. As far as how, I honestly don't have an answer.
Once again, this assignment is showing how much I really don't watch the news or keep up with a lot of current events because I have not heard a single thing about this virus or the word Zika for that matter. Usually 'On The Media' has various stories on their weekly show, however clearly this topic is very important because it is the single topic covered in this weeks show. This virus covers a lot of areas of interest and rather than zone in on just one of the 5-7 minute excerpts, I chose to look at all of them to get a good grasp of this virus and what is being done about it.
I first wanted to explore "the Zika poster child" because I believe it taps into both a psychological and social context. In the interview with Patricia Mello, who is a writer for the major newspaper in Brazil; she discusses how the country didn't really react to this virus or do much about it until it started to affect newborns. The same trend followed with the general public, through not necessarily losing sleep over this virus until they started seeing these photos of the affected infants. Why do we do this with media? Why do we not care about something until it hits a little part in our heart, much like the viral photo of the deceased boy on the beach? I think that it's become this way partly because of social trends. Print media no longer reaches the mass public and therefore doesn't get much thought. A photo however gets liked, shared, posted, blogged and spreads like wildfire. A photo metaphorically is worth a thousand words and each person relates to it differently. The photo of this child affected by the Zika Virus is a social aspect because it turned this virus from a public problem to a community problem.
The other reason we react to photos like this and consequently decide to finally take action is also a psychological one. One of the most effective ways to persuade someone is through pathos (or emotion). Simply telling someone, "hey there is a very harmful Zika virus going around, we really should take action to combat this" isn't as effective as showing a picture or video of a woman holding her infected baby and crying. Our brains like connections and concepts to build relationships of things that we can use when certain stimuli presents itself. So when we see a photo or video (especially of children) trying to promote something, chances are we will listen and act. We do this because we can relate to that, whether it's on a human basis, a parent basis, love basis ect.
I also listened to the podcast of Brooke Gladstone interviewing Jonathan Katz, a reporter who caught the Zika virus, however not the associated panic. I laughed a few times while listening to this because he was so blunt and realistic about it all. I like that he wasn't trying to say that this Virus isn't something that needs to be addressed but he thinks it doesn't do any good for the media to just scare people. This is a major cultural issue especially in the United States. The media always seems to exasperate issues and people get concerned and worked up over something they know very little about. I like that Ebola was also brought up and the few "moments of fame" it got and now this Zika virus is breaking news. I agree with Jonathan in that we don't need to panic about the Zika virus, we need to educate ourselves on what it is and take the necessary steps to prevent it.
I think this is a hard issue to have a "stand" on because it's not like I can really choose to support or believe in the virus ha ha. It really helped tuning into this weeks show and educating myself on what this virus is and how it may or may not affect me. I really think there is a problem with people listening to the news or following social media on a matter and taking it face value. It's easy for people to say "oh this is global crisis! I am never leaving my house again!" On the other side it is easy to claim that it's not an issue, it doesn't affect me. I myself, found myself saying, "well just kill off all the mosquitos, problem solved!" According to the interview with Nikos Vasilakis, it isn't that easy. I think the biggest concern now is the virus slowly making its way to the United States and of course the devastating effects it is having on infants. I believe these are very valid concerns and ones that definitely need to be addressed. As far as how, I honestly don't have an answer.
Monday, February 8, 2016
Learning 2.0 Well Informed Post
For my learning 2.0 post, I really wanted to look into how learning is changing in each of the 3 main stages of education; elementary, high school, and college. There was a definite trend that I noticed as I was searching for articles and talks on the topic and that was "are schools failing?" No wonder education is one of the top things debated about among politicians, apparently there are a lot of people who think learning is being done the "wrong" way and others who think it is being done efficiently and effectively.
Let's start off with elementary learning and the possible issues that exist within. My first curiosity dealt with the ever rising use of I-pads and other technology methods to teach young kids. I already have a negative opinion with this issue so it was difficult for me to have an open mind. I found this article on {http://www.edutopia.org/blog/21st-century-schools-or-learning-george-couros} by George Couros addressing 21st century learning and what that means. He basically addressed the concern whether our schools are being renovated and improved or if the actual education and learning is being reimagined? He goes on to say that more and better technology is being placed in schools yet most teachers don't know how or choose not to implement them properly. This is my concern with I-pads, they aren't supposed to replace the teacher or create shortcuts within learning. They should promote and drive creativity and unique individual learning!
Moving on to High School and we see a trend of a dip in learning. Why all of a sudden when kids get to high school, so many are uninterested in learning and dislike school? Is it merely a social issue or a personality issue? Perhaps we are keeping with the same learning styles for 14-18 year olds as we did when they were 5-12 years old. How can we expect them to grow and adapt if we aren't adjusting the teaching? I watched a Ted talk that discussed this very issue {http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity} Ken Robinson talks about how schools are often "killing creativity" with how the education structure is set up. He also discusses this popular phenomenon that takes over most western schools known as "one size fits all" learning. He explains that the older we get and mature and change, our learning preferences and styles change too. Yet it seems if a high school student is having a difficult time and falling behind, they have three choices. 1)get moved to a "special class" with students that have serious/permanent disabilities 2) try to find someone who has the time and interest to tutor you or hopefully your parents have money for a private tutor or 3) keep struggling, get frustrated, end up hating school because they only ever "fail" and in the worst cases, drop out entirely. {http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/columnists/starr_points/starr007.shtml}
We need to adjust the learning styles in high school so there are a wider variety of stimuli for all students to connect with! High school needs to be a time of growth and learning and not just a time to "get through."
Finally, we get to the glorious stage of College. The good thing here is that within the last 20 or so years, there has been a steady increase in the amount of students graduating high school and then continuing on to college and at least getting an Associates degree. I think this is amazing and when I think about myself getting ready to graduate with my Bachelors degree, it makes me feel proud that I am the first one in my family to achieve this in many generations.. maybe ever so things are definitely changing! But then comes a concern that we briefly talked about in class last week that many college students are now wanting to be sheltered from certain things. In this awesome article/interview, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt discuss the "coddling of the American mind."
{http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/}
I couldn't believe what I was reading! I thought it was a satirical article because how could these adults with the whole world at their feet, be so affected and offended by educational topics? I thought it was really depressing that professors are scared to teach for fear of "saying the wrong thing" and possibly getting fired for it! How is this even learning if we can't explore the unknown, get out of our comfort zone, and question our beliefs from time to time?
This brings me to my conclusion of what I think about everything I've read and seen so far. I personally think learning has become lazy. I think it is being highly underestimated and undervalued.
I watched an 'On The Media' segment titled "The Failure of Failing Schools"{http://www.onthemedia.org/story/199317-failure-failing-schools}
Paul Farhi explains my position very well! I don't think it is fair or even logical for us to say learning is "bad" currently because our schools and teachers are "failing us." I think there are really amazing teachers out there that love their job, there are also many teachers who aren't so great and dislike their job. Even so, I can't place the blame on the teachers. I think the people responsible for successful learning are parents and the student. Students need to have the desire to learn and the parents need to be consistent in facilitating the means for them to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)