A: Definitions
Sender: The entity that has a message to be transmitted.
Receiver: The entity that will be receiving the aforementioned message.
Encoding: The conversion of message so that it can be sent in a transmittable format.
Decoding: The conversion of the message so that it can be understood by the receiver.
Channel: Whatever is delivering the message.
Noise: Distractions or disruptions that can alter the message.

B: Design-Specific Example
I work as a production specialist for a lead providing company. When the schools we provide leads for want changes made to their web pages, they tell our sales representatives what they want done. The sales reps that I work with are the senders in this scenario. They take the information that the customers give them and use it to fill out a form in Salesforce (this is the encoding process). Salesforce, the channel, carries this information to me, the decoder. I take the information from Salesforce and try and carry out my task with it. Noise occurs in this process when the information is represented incorrectly in Salesforce. The receiver of the message is whoever is viewing the webpage that I updated. If done correctly, they will be seeing what the salesperson wants them to see.

Sender: The sales rep.
Receiver: Potential college students (looking at the lead website).
Encoding: The sales rep inputting the info provided into Salesforce.
Decoding: This is my job as a production specialist.
Channel: Salesforce.
Noise: Miscommunications, misunderstandings, typos.

C: Another Example
Gossip:

Sender: Whoever has the dirt.
Receiver: Anyone who wants to hear the dirt.
Encoding: The spin the sender puts on the dirt.
Decoding: The bias the receiver has to sift through.
Channel: The air. Multiple people. Email. Notes.
Noise: The biases/personal opinions that are picked up through the gossip chain.

D: Which model?

The communication model for the last example would be Westley and MacLean’s model.

Holy cow reading the article “Communication Models” was an exercise in understanding and cognition! I think the webpage used The Shannon-Weaver Mathematical Model to explain the information on the webpage. Using a tin can telephone system to explain the following terms:

Sender: the person who originates a message to be spoken into the tin can phone.

→

Encoding: As the message travels along the string it is encoded into sound vibrations that are received at the other end of the string.

→

Channel: is the physical act of the string channeling the sound vibrations along the string.

→

Noise: In a tin can phone it is hard to have noise, which acts as an interference factor. However if someone touches the string the message is convoluted or disrupted between sender and receiver.

→

Decoding: Occurs at the opposite end of the string, when the message is sent to the receiver, who interprets the message depending on the amount of noise and quality of the channel the message it is sent out upon.

→

Receiver: The person who receives and interprets the message into his/her own words and can then resend another message via feedback, or pass along the message to another receiver thus becoming a sender who can interpret the original message thus causing noise upon the original message.

In my own design work I have had experience with this communication model, when I was working with a client that needed some design work for a webpage. The sender of the message would be the client who contacted me to create his website. The contact would occur as the messages sent via email regarding his needs, acts as the decoding of the message he sent. Email and telephone calls acted as the channel of information sent from him to me. When I received the message, I as the contracted employee acted as the receiver, who in turn decoded his needs into technical explanations of the work to be created, feedback also played a part as we communicated more in order to reach a mutual understanding of his wants, needs, and actual completion capabilities within his budget. Noise, was created by the person who referred me this client. The referral came from a common friend who had no design experience and began to tell (my future) client what was possible and easily accomplished within his small budget.

Definitions
Sender: the person or entity that sends the message
Receiver: the person(s) who receives the message
Encoding: the act of converting the information or message into a format that can be transmitted
Decoding: the act of organizing received data into useful information
Channel: the medium that is used to transmit the message
Noise: anything that is not part of the message that interferes with the transmission of the message

Example
Sender: Client
Receiver: Creative Director
Encoding: Client Contact
Decoding: Account Manager
Channel: Telephone
Noise: the Boss

Scenario
The above example is from my days of being an account manager in a catalog design house. Any time when we were working on a job, inevitably, the client contact would call me with directions or changes. Here’s what typically would take place: the client contact discusses with her boss (sender) what changes need to be made, (message) she (encoder)would then call me on the telephone (channel) to convey the message. While I, as the account manager (decoder), am on the phone with the client contact to digest the message, my boss (the noise) would usually watch over my shoulder to add his opinions, disturbing my concentration. After I organized all the information, my boss (the noise) would usually like to put his spin on it before I hand it over to the creative director (the receiver). In order to reduce the amount of noise, my creative director and I would then have a private meeting to go over all the changes and “delete” anything that my boss said.

Communication Model
The Shannon-Weaver model fits this scenario quite well.

Sender
The message or idea creator chooses to send out the message. The source of the information, attitudes, knowledge about the subject for the message

Receiver
The person or persons receiving the message are the receiver. Those who may or may not take action on information received.
Encoding
The encoder sets up the structure, format, content, and elements that the sender wants the receiver to know.

Decoding
Decoding takes into account the appeal to the five senses of the receiver and their personal method of interpreting. The social network influence, cultural experience and attitudes of the receiver influence how the receiver interprets the message.

Channel
Channel is the method of putting out the message. This could be print, audio, televised or video, interactive and many other choices.

Noise
Noise could be counter information in the near vicinity; competition messages or even real noise such as feed back in a microphone that distracts from the message. Good encoding plans take this into account; at least the predictable interference there may be.

My employment with Windermere was creating flyers and brochures for the sale of homes ranging from condos to multi-million dollar homes.
Sender
This home is THE one you want. Come and look. Here is the main information to answer initial questions. Look at these pictures.

Receiver
The person or persons seriously looking for a home to purchase.
Encoding
High quality photos are used. Sometimes these photos were enhanced to emphasize the best points of the home, with care not to misrepresent, like removing electrical wires from the view or the railroad tracks from the back yard. Closing the garage door and removing the dumpster from the driveway are acceptable photo enhancements. Information to be included gives an accurate picture of affordability (taxes sometimes included in info) and size of the space, rooms/bathrooms in the home and any special features, such as private back yard, hot tub, near a beach, etc.

Decoding
Again, sender must not misrepresent. Keep in mind the demographic of the likely buyers in this price range. Give enough information to satisfy the need to know, yet whet the appetite with the need to know more.

Channel
At the home, drive-by interested parties will be able to pick up a flyer at a street-side box. In the home, when prospective purchasers are shown the home, especially if it is a high end home, a brochure should be available. Rather than one page of information, the brochure is 4 pages of information, mostly high-end photos of the best features of the home. The home must be featured in as many home search websites as possible. This requires good choice of one or two photos and a short description that catches attention and still gives the essential information to encourage further action.

Noise
Websites have a lot of homes listed in competition with the one the sender is featuring. Personal needs and preferences of the buyer narrows the field somewhat. It is up to the sender to portray their listing in the best way to engender action. The brochures are a good way to create the noise needed to keep an edge against the competition. It helps the buyer keep clear what they saw and liked at which home. It serves to remind the buyer of the beauty and features of one particular home over another. Additional noise would be in design. Crowding too much onto the page, overdone with text, making text small, placing pictures with distracting elements prominent, would be noise detracting from the intended message.
Our group studied Jame’s Horton’s Communication Model. That is a very linear model and the Real Estate method seems to fit that model well.

Tuesday December 1, 2009

Dear Ian and Paul,

Going into University I was a nervous wreck, worried about the work all the way to how I’d get there. It was partly the reason I took an extra year of high school to avoid confronting this journey. Now that my first semester is almost complete, I am glad that I went.

When I was at KickStart, I spoke to my group leader about the courses that I’d be taking first semester. She told me that Mass Communication was a good course to take due to the fun assignment you start the semester off with and what she learned. Those are two elements that I can agree to.

The first assignment was the media autobiography and I thought when I was done that I had done a good job. To me, my writing was at it’s best for the type of assignment and the creative aspect was a good as any. Though when you handed back the assignment and told me I only got 64%, I felt discouraged. I felt that all my hard work had been over nothing. Also when you added that the entire class was writing at a Grade 6 level, it hurt even more as throughout high school, I had gotten English marks in the 80s. They say harsh comments can be good and this was no exception as it showed me I had to work harder to achieve the results I was looking for. I knew at that point to buckle down and try to make sure to put more effort in my writing.

These lessons I took into the second assignment – the blogs. I was nervous about the blogs a little at first as I knew you had to be clear and also express each topic fully. Though when it came time to start writing them, the thoughts just poured out and it was all about organizing them correctly. Now that all 12 blogs are done for the semester, I am happy I went forth with them. They really allowed me to really look at each topic that we had discussed in class and learn more about how it related to the real world. Each topic really allowed me to explore the world surrounding me and also learn more about myself as a person. With these blogs, they really helped enhance the learning experience for me as it gave me another way to further understand them as in class after a lecture, I’d still be slightly unsure if I got what you meant. It also gave me the opportunity to improve my writing (64% to a 74%) so I’d be ready for the big assignment – the midterm paper.

The semiotics paper bit my nerves the most as I knew there was high expectations and with what you told us with regards to writing it. In high school, I was use to getting a marking sheet that explained how the marks would be given and to show what was expected and an approximate length to write to. When I read the page on the wiki talking about the mid-term, I shocked to see neither. Reading that paragraph or two that said what had to be done, it really left me with questions that I wasn’t sure I could answer to do a good job. Though like the blogs when it came to the writing, the nerves disappeared as I dove into my topic making sure to express the meaning behind each element.

The assignments certainly did lots for me as they let me grow as a writer and enhance my mind with more thoughts. But I wouldn’t have been able to do that without the topics and readings that you had us do.

The first reading of the course was the Playboy interview with Marshall McLuhan. It seemed intimidating due to the length as most articles I’d read in the past had been ten pages or less. It also wasn’t an easy read due to the content as it had been confused in many parts, though the content was good. Two things that I clearly remember from that article is the quote he said about the medium being the message and how you can’t understand media till after it’s done with. This invoked the discussion of media ideology and he spoke truth in those words as shown throughout the semester with the other readings and discussions.

The second major reading was Ways of Seeing by John Berger and that was an interesting read. The essay he wrote with regards to woman and how they pose really had me up in the air as it was something I couldn’t agree with. Though if you look at the images and think about the meaning, you realized he made sense. Another good point he made was how people like to show off what they own, in which I agreed with as you still see pictures of people and what they own and you have MTV Cribs for the stars to show off what they own. Lastly, he discussed how print pictures have changed with the world, in which he brings up good points as his points were points brought up during Photography class. My photography professor Karen Whylie discussed how the pictures are now easily accessed, though they still are better to look at in a book or the original as it brings out the elements more. John Berger’s view points connected also to what we did in class as different elements when discussed connected to his philosophy of how we see the world, such as girls in commercials.

The third piece I read was Chuck Klosterman’s Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs, which was my favorite of the semester. The way he wrote his chapters to prove his points had you thinking you were just having a discussion with him and it didn’t seem as if it was an essay. Though when you walked away from the chapter, you realized the point he was proving and how well he embedded it into you. This really connected with our in-class discussion on semiotics (the breakdown of how media works) as in many cases with his chapters, he was doing the semiotic breakdown of a topic to showcase what he thought. The study of the semiotics of media really breaks down to figuring out how the media portrays its message by breaking down the elements. Your words in saying, “Nothing is an accident in the media.” was proven many times by all the deconstructions done of pieces with encoding and decoding the media. The discussion contained how the media impacts with us and the effects that they use, such as symbols.

The forth piece I read was Scott McCloud’s Understanding Comics, which was a good read. Like Chuck Klosterman, Scott also wrote in a way where you knew you were learning something yet also in a way you could lightly read it. I also liked with how he chose to write it as it connected to his topic and allowed him to display examples so you could understand him. Scott’s analysis of comics connected well to the discussion of the language and images in the media as Scott’s look at comics was a good example and some of the elements connected to advertisements. In reading Understanding Comics before class, it allowed me to a gasp on the possible discussions in class and get an idea on what would be discussed.

The fifth piece I read was John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton’s Toxic Sludge is Good for You in which turned out to be interesting. It was good to see a perspective on the media from the public relation’s side and what they’re trying to do when they put out their messages. Throughout the semester already, we had discussed the message content, though looking at someone’s role in the media helped further enhance that look at the media. It connected well with the in-class discussion about the construction of media and further enhanced the study of semiotics to therefore give you a behind-the-scenes perspective. Secondly, the next in-class discussion with regards to who owns what further enhanced the discussion as it allowed a further behind the scenes look and possible reason for certain content.

The last piece I read was Lawrence Lessig’s Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity with discussion towards copyright. That discussion in-class equaled lots of curiosity on my point as points discussed with regards to certain information and the new bill that may be passed. I am on the internet lots and sometimes use certain information in articles I write (always making sure to credit my sources) so to therefore learn the uses of it really helped me out. It also connected well to the discussion on net neutrality with regards to information and what should and should not be posted on the internet. It was a discussion that equaled curiosity also as interesting points wee made about certain points.

The final discussions in-class with regards to participatory culture, media activism and culture jamming as it discussed what we could do in the media based upon what we’ve learned and hate about the media. Culture Jamming was one of the neatest topics discussed in class as the actions taken by people with what they don’t like about the media sparked interest in my part. These are people who definitely have shown that they can do neat things and invoke the ideology behind participatory culture.

In conclusion, I have to thank you for an awesome semester as you’ve allowed me to grow my mind and continue to get better at my writing. Thank you for the memories and hopefully the rest of University turns out as good as this course ‘cause if so, it’ll be an awesome journey.

Sincerely,

Ashley McCubbin

The AEJMC Scholars Program awards $2,500 research and teaching grants to up to four AEJMC members to encourage innovative and timely projects in journalism and mass communication. Proposals for these grants were solicited in the fall of 2009, and selections will be announced in January 2010.

The AEJMC Scholars Program is designed to develop and nurture outstanding teachers and researchers by fostering an intellectually stimulating environment. This program’s mission is to identify, encourage and recognize some of AEJMC’s most promising scholars by providing partial funding for research or teaching projects.

Each proposal selected for funding will also be matched with a recognized scholar to serve as a mentor throughout the project. The mentor will serve as a resource and sounding board as the work progresses.

AEJMC expects to showcase initial results from the first round of these grants at a special session at the AEJMC 2010 Convention in Denver. In addition to the $2,500 grant, AEJMC will also provide $500 for each selected proposal to assist with travel expenses to the Denver Convention.

The moniker of misunderstoodsunshinekid sounds like some teenage bubblegum nickname that reeks of adolescence and youthfulness. And certainly not very appropriate for a man who turned 21 for the sixth time this year. There is, of course, a meaning behind this deliberate choice of words.

Coined towards the end of my time in Ngee Ann Polytechnic where I studied Mass Communication, it first appeared in the yearbook which was contributed by and distributed to every student in the cohort. The editorial team asked each of us for a photograph and three words that best described ourselves. Come to think of it, considering that I’ve not seen 90% of my school mates since we graduated, these three words would actually go a long way in helping us remember each other.

It was really amusing to see some of the entries. The more commonly used words were “Bubbly”, “Friendly”, “Outgoing”, “Sociable”, “Funny”, etcetera – basically words that were safe, correct and well, forgettable. There were some that went out of the box with “Nobody Knows Me”, “Damned I’m Good”, “Ahh Whatever Lah” and “I Am Indescribable”. But the one that tickled me most was “Humourous, Cheerful, Easygoing” and attached with the words was a really fierce, unfriendly and serious picture. Nice.

Without going into too much detail, here’s why I chose “Misunderstood Sunshine Kid”:

Misunderstood
Half my life I’ve been misunderstood for my intentions, choice of words and actions. I’d like to believe that it’s always been love-hate with me; people don’t really have a neutral feeling towards me. They either like me or dislike me. And because of this I almost always end up leaving either a great or a horrible first impression. As I age, I’ve learnt to deal with it by simply not bothering about it; I cannot please everyone, so I’ve learnt to stop having to justify or explain what I say or do. I’ve embraced this as a part of me and the only approval I seek would be that of God’s. I’ve learnt to take myself less seriously and not be so uptight about what people say or think about me. Yeah, I know this sounds very teenage/emo/angst, but hey, this term was coined when I was a 19-year-old teenager.

Sunshine
I’ve always been a positive and optimistic person and I think that it rubs off on the people that I interact with, especially with those in my sphere of influence. I’d like to I exude a “You can do it” vibe. On a side note, my heart goes out to pessimistic and negative people, but how they live their lives is their problem, not mine. I desire to be contented and always joyful. Another ethos which I live by is, “I could always be happier but I am situationally contented”. That was a phrase I coined together with PL some years ago. To an extent this word contradicts the former, but both somehow capture a key essence of my personality and character.

Kid
I’m always up to some mischief and I’ve always enjoyed being cheeky and naughty. There is a difference between being childish and childlike. I never want to lose the sense of wonder that children have. I always want to retain the kid in me, for the kid that I will have in future. I am confident that I will be a father with the “sparkle” in his eye. You know, kids are actually very sensitive and can detect sincerity from hypocrisy. I enjoy playing with kids and I think they (know it and) enjoy it too because they see it in my eyes – that I really want to play with them and I’m not afraid of embarrassing myself. I’ve always dreamt about being the father that my father never was to me. And for that to happen, I’ll always have that boyish playfulness hidden behind a now older and wiser head.

Each word could be an entry in itself so I’ll just leave it like that until I decide to elaborate further.

Are you from the people who have good qualification but no job in your hand? If yes, this article is for you. With this page, you will get little relax as we are offering a job for you. This job is all about content writing and editing. We will provide you topics and you need to write a good article on that. Don’t worry we will provide complete guidance and training using that you can learn the skills very easily. 

So if you have a Graduate degree (prefer if any specialization in English, Mass Communication and related industry) and good hand on MS word & internet, you can contact with me. You can also contact me if you have good English writing skills without having any degree. My email address is harishjee.com@gmail.com. Send me your complete resume and I will arrange a good profile in my company, Khulbe Web Solutions.

Initially when I was studying for a diploma, every time anyone asked me “What’s your plans after this?”, I used answer confidently that I’m gonna work for sometime then continue with my studies. My reasoning was simple, that I would be more matured by then and working experience would help me understand my subjects better.

So now here I am, straight after graduation in the media field – even got a job I exactly wanted. But somehow, I’m not as ecstatic anymore.  I have to be honest and say that it was hard for me to accept that I’m working now, instead of having a jolly good time in uni. Suddenly reality set in and the torture of sitting in one place the whole day facing your computer screen began to crush me.

So you hate your job?

Don’t take me wrong that I don’t like what I do as a digital planner. (Okay, doing the excel sheets are bit boring but…) I’ve been exposed to so many new, interesting & challenging stuffs that I would have never known if I wasn’t working. But it’s the flexibility that I need.

Of course, everyone was advising me about it – “any job wouldn’t be easy when you start, you’ve got to work your way up”. In other words, it means you’ve got to sacrifice time that you used to have with family & friends, give up your passion, hobby and literally run of a working treadmill like a hamster.

Observing people around me, it seems like it is the norm, this is how life is supposed to be once you begin your career. Somehow, back to square one – I can’t digest that!

I don't wanna end up this way!

What’s your point?

Reading an article by Alexandra Wong in The Star, I realized that I’m not alone in this situation. Many others feel the same way but have somehow got used to it. Bunny as she calls herself in her blog, is one person who refused to be the average. Instead of going with “the flow”, she swims against it.

I respect her in many ways after reading this article, she definitely made a profound impact on me. How I wish I could take charge of my life too, and follow her footsteps. And that got me thinking, ACTUALLY WHY NOT?

So you gonna quit your job or what…?

I don’t have a plan yet, I dunno what I’m going to pursue after this – digital media, copywriting or perhaps start my own business.

By doing so, maybe I won’t have to image that I’m working in a big corporate company anymore or stand a chance to be titled a manager in the long run, or maybe I won’t be making as much money. There are many maybes, but it definitely seems like a better idea than working my life away.

But till then, I’m gonna do my very best and learn as much as I can in my current job.

carpe diem

The Youth Activism Project is a project focused on people under the age of 18 to take leadership. On their website, they state that 46% of the world is under the age of 18 so with those numbers, you would think working together they could state a message. They also state on their website that the future is 100% about them, which is true as they’ll have to live in the mistakes that previous generations have made.

There is no lies in this being possible for youth to take action as it was shown at a Canadian school. Students who weren’t happy with the future actions by the government and how it could affect greenhouse gases for the future took part in a project to raise awareness. The environmental team got each student in the school to call the government office and complain. They got the government’s attention as a representive called the school and told the principal to stop the complaints. Though in a different quote to the media, the government’s office said they didn’t do that as they welcome comments from everyone. Now, who do you believe? Students who are trying to make a difference in the envrionment or the government? Your choice, but I have my theory.

Though even with this stated, the government knew already youth could make a difference. The government has now started pointing campaigns towards late high school students and university/college students to try to get them to persuade their votes towards them. What do you call discussions on tuition fees?

So no matter what age you are, know you can make a difference. All it takes is using your voice or some sort of action to spread your point.

——————————————————————

[1]Youth Activism Project. Youth Activism Project, Inc. Web. 24 Nov. 2009. http://www.youthactivism.com/Home.php.

[2]“11-23-09 News Cast.” CTV News. CTV. CTV, 23 Nov. 2009. Television.

Let me start off by saying that I really have had no political engagement to any activist project prior to this post, nor will I after the fact. In saying that, I would like to comment on the controversial group named “Our Fight Against 203, The Canadian Fight for Automotive Freedom”. They are a group of automotive enthusiasts that feel the so called “street racing laws” are extremely over the top in terms of punishment, especially when compared to other motoring laws. Now before I continue, I want to make it clear I am not for street racing in any shape or form. I am for racing, when done on a proper track and safely monitored. I have decided to comment on this groups actions because I will agree that the terms of punishment that are being given to suspected street racers is a little too harsh. For example if you are caught going 50km/h or more in a 100km/h zone, you are subject to a roadside seizure of the vehicle, suspended license for a week , the impoundment of your car for a week and up to a $ 10,000 fine if convicted. First I will comment on the title “street racer”, which I find being used a little too liberal nowadays. If you were caught breaking this law you are immediately labelled a “street racer”, I find this completely pathetic. If you were caught speeding, yes you should be fined, but to be labelled a “street racer” adds a completely different dynamic to you M.O.

And I can tell you this that title will do nothing for your case when attending court, and frankly this is why I think the government has decided to use such a term.  It automatically makes you guilty and sets you up for failure in the court room. Secondly there is this ridiculous notion that people that choose to speed at 150km/h or more should be possibly fined up to $10,000 which is insanity. To put this into context, if you are caught doing 149km/h, more than likely you would be fined around $500 and three demerit points. Oh and by the way you would not get a road side seizure, a massive fine, you car impounded etc.

The point I am trying to make is, this law and others might seem as they were designed to help our city remain safe but in actuality they are simple cash grabs that generate money for a city that squandered all of their resources away. And if you’re still not convinced, then why is it for the last few years the City of Toronto has implemented the “personal vehicle tax” to every driver when they renew their license? So next time you renew your sticker which costs $75 and there is an extra fee of $60 attached to it you might want to think to yourself why are you being charged this amount. It’s simple really, CASH GRAB!



My involvement in a participatory culture has been steadily changing since I was a child and played my first videogame. I would never have thought (back then anyways) that my involvement would be so great that I would share online friends through a gaming system. Even to this day, I am only involved casually because of my time constraints from school and work, but I must admit I enjoy the downtime very much. The culture itself is an interesting one to say the least, in that today 80% of hardcore gamers must choose were their loyalty lies within the culture itself. Currently there are three main players in the gaming world, Microsoft’s Xbox 360, Sony’s Playstation and Nintendo’s Wii all having their own merits. The other 20% of players will own more than one of these systems at any particular time, so essentially the remaining players must decide where the line is drawn.

I personally find that most people who choose Xbox 360 are ones who enjoy online game play very much and the ability obtain bragging rights of beating someone as far away as Australia. And the Sony player will push the point of their system being able to play Blu-ray movies on top of video games. That leaves us with the Wii player who from a hardcore gaming standpoint is really not on the same level. This is not to say the level of interaction is worse than the other two, because it is not is actually more involving. But moreover the system is not really marketed as a hardcore, shoot’em up, killing system like Xbox and PS. It is more of a juvenile, family oriented system that makes its focus on friendly and entertaining entertainment. Where Xbox and PS can be considered a 17+ system the Nintendo Wii is somewhere situated in the PG realm.

My involvement with gaming begins at the level of enjoyment of a new game that helps me escape reality and ends at I rather go out with my girlfriend than play video games. Unfortunately for some, they become completely absorbed by the nature of the video game that it ends up replacing the world in which they live in. For example in the news was a story of a gamer in Japan that died while playing video games; how is this possible? Well the gamer in question decided he wanted to start marathon gaming and never left his seat for a total of a week, no food, water, not even getting up to use the bathroom. This is an example of where video games tend to replace reality for some. Unfortunately it is this type of behaviour that has the ability to encourage an individual to do violent acts amongst others. People must understand the fine line between the real world and that of one made up of monsters.

George A Romero…ring a bell? Or perhaps the blood curdling sounds of a hungry zombie? Well this is one of the names and some sounds that you could hear in many different urban areas when the Zombie Walk is held. Originating in Sacramento, California in 2001, Zombie Walks, or Zombie Mobs have popped up in major cities for the last eight years and they continue to grow. In fact our very own beloved Toronto has one every year which originated in October 2003 with a total of 6 people, but which has grown to over 1100 last year. Zombie Walks have created a type of culture jamming that usually is not seen here in the Western world, or for that matter all over the world. These walks have even spawned charity events and food drives and continues to evolve to new areas of interest.

Culture jamming was intended to disrupt the mainstream and to essentially go against the corporate world through activism. The Zombie Walk is no different, but I find it interesting that the very characters these people are trying to depict to fight against corporate dictatorship, were essentially created by the entity there are trying so hard to fight. Regardless, this type of culture jamming has proved prominent in that it has brought awareness not only to pressing subjects but that it has brought an entire landscape of people together.

From all over the world, people in many urban areas come together once a year with a common goal. Although there have been accounts of some violence, and even people have been calling local authorities to complain of zombies attacking them, the underlining tone remains the same in that it brings mass groups of people that share a common goal together as a group. I find it interesting that a society is able to converge on subjects while acting as the dead. Maybe we don’t even need the makeup, because we are all aware of zombie mentality.

I would like to start this blog off by saying that “Buy Nothing Day” is a crock a shit, sorry but that is the way I feel. First off, I would like to make it clear that it is impossible to go through a day in the western world without purchasing something directly or indirectly. I am going to bring this theory from paper to practice to prove my point, and show that is impossible. This will apply to anyone, think about this, you wake up on November 25, 2009 and decided to make an attempt not to purchase anything, good for you. So anyways, you wake up decide not to check your email through the computer, phone or any other sources, check. Well since you have a bit more time you decide to make breakfast, but because you have chosen to “buy nothing”, you can’t fry an egg, use the toaster, microwave etc., better stick with that fruit that has been rotting on you counter buddy.

Ok so now you have eaten, time to get your day started so you decide to brush your teeth, WOOPS!, better use a bottle of water my friend, turning on the taps constitutes indirectly buying hydro, same goes for the shower stinky. You decide to give yourself a French bath and continue struggling through your day and it is only 8:00 a.m. Time to go to work, you need gas for your car because you forgot to fill it up the night before, sorry buster. Alright what are our options? Bus? Nope. Bike? Nope, work is too far. Taxi? Nope. Alright so now you have decided that you can’t go to work because your transportation methods are bunk. So you decide to stay home, but are unable to call your boss because that would enable technology which indirectly costs money. Ok, so now you stuck at home on a cold winter’s day, but you can’t turn the lights on, forget about turning on the furnace, and did I forget to mention that you must go to the bathroom outside like a dog. It is at this point you realize that you should have just stayed in bed, because that doesn’t cost anything right? Wrong, rent is due bud!

Anyways, as you can see through my little sketch, it really is impossible not to buy nothing for a day, and maybe that’s the lesson here. Western society has become so dependent on the technology that we use day in day out that we simply cannot go through a single day without it. This is true, but it is my right as a hard working citizen of this country to do so. For the people who started this campaign, I feel that they are hypocritical in nature in that they use these given rights just as much as the next guy while creating a stink about them. Personally I feel if you believe that Western culture has become this self indulgent, then move, go live with the Bushman of the Kalahari Desert. And by the way, it’s going to cost you.

From the conception of the internet, corporations, small businesses, individuals alike have been attempting to make their mark on the World Wide Web. It started with the ability to create websites to represent a product and or service, to communicate with others through email, and read message boards. Today the internet has become a breeding ground for every Tom, Dick and Harry that represents more individual characteristics, through mediums like Facebook, Twitter, Skype and YouTube to name a few. It seems like the advertising portion that essentially made the internet through websites has been playing second fiddle to the individual.  But this battleground between public and private interests has been brewing for many years; this is not a new subject.

For example even from the beginning of the internet, rumours have circulated that internet providers will be incorporating a “Modem Tax”, which will be applied to each IP address. In the urban legends book Baby Train, “The Modem Tax Rumour”, has been said that the “FCC has proposed that users of modems should pay extra charges for the public telephone networks which carry their data”. “Additionally, computer network services would be charged as much as $6.00 per hour per user for the public telephone network”. This “rumour” was collected in 1993 and circulated for many years and disappeared. In today’s modern internet age this rumour has essentially turned into private enterprises attempting to regulate what and how much we are allowed to view through the internet. And even being charged for over use of the broadband by having limits to the amount we are able to download. I believe this is the private entities way of fighting back against these aforementioned Tom, Dick and Harries (the public), that have honestly taken over the complete landscape of the internet. So it almost seems that his urban legend is coming to fruition in that the private sector is attempting to charge the public (the same public that made the internet what it is today) for specific use.

If this trend continues, and corporations continue attempts to control this public medium then I fear that the internet will merely transform in to rotting corpse. Think of the internet as being a thriving city that continues to evolve because everyday new people are moving in and adding to the structures that have created it. Now if these people continue to be blocked, regulated and denied access to their surroundings, the end result will be that everyone will disappear. Comparing this to the internet it is no different, people will eventually use it on a minimal bases because the cost will become too great thus shutting down the very concept of what the internet was founded on. And in the end the infrastructure will collapse leaving us with the following: http://wwww.globalgrind.com/source/www.chirpthis.com/334723/internet-1993-peter-mansbridge/

And this would be an extremely scary thought.

Media…it is what shapes a culture, defines public opinion and most importantly has the ability to create mass hysteria (case in point the H1N1 flu coverage). Looking at a large major media company such as Rogers, it is very evident the power that can be used when cross media ownership is apparent. In total Rogers Communications owns four telephone divisions’, two cable divisions’, 36 radio divisions’, 11 television divisions’ (some minority interest), 62 publication divisions’ and finally, owns and operates the Toronto Blue Jays and Rogers Centre (formally Skydome).

Do you see a problem here? I don’t. It is possible that cross media ownership has implications that could dilute or even regurgitate the corporations’ views through all of their outlets, essentially telling you the same message over and over but through many different streams. Or even that because of this mass ownership, it enables a large corporation such as Rogers to have a stranglehold or monopoly on dispersion of media.  I say so what, researching what Rogers Communications owns and operates, I found a lot of radio stations and publications that might not necessarily be here to today if it wasn’t for the strength of a corporation like Rogers.  Taking it further, we can also see that with the amount that is owned by Rogers, jobs have also been created or in some incidents where Rogers has taken over a struggling publication, radio station, media outlet etc. have been saved.

Yes a corporation has the ability to abuse their cross media ownership to benefit the bottom line and to advance personal causes. But it does not happen overnight and every other business entity and individual had the same opportunity to do the same. If you approached Ted Rogers 50 years ago and brought him the list of what his corporation would own and operate, he would more than likely say don’t believe what the media has to say, how ironic.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Work Cited-http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=rogers

For this assignment, I interviewed the following people:

My youngest brother, 19.

A friend from college, 21

My mother, 53

My father, 53

My grandmother, 78

My grandfather, 81

Their responses were all similar in that they all did not recognize the first amendment when they heard it. I noticed that as their ages increased, the responses of my interviewees began to get a little more conservative. My parents, for example, felt as though sometimes protests could be taken “too far” and that people “got away with too many things” while claiming protection from the first amendment. My grandparents agreed with my parents, but I have noticed that they think that people get away with too many things in daily life, regardless of the connection they have to the first amendment.

My brother and friend from college are both from well off middle class families, and are extremely liberal. My parents (also, obviously from a well off middle class family) are on the conservative side, and tend to be generally disapprove of “young and wild” things. My grandparents are very religious and had their fair share of struggles when trying to migrate to North America (they are from India and currently live in Canada).  I can understand why they did not recognize the first amendment. They have never lived in the US. My family also missed out on that crucial class (is it in fifth grade?) where one learns all of these basic things. I was in South Korea at the time, I think. The Canadian Constitution is quite similar, though most likely worded differently and based off of something British.

Almost all of my interviewees agreed that the freedoms listed in the first amendment are valid and deserve to be protected.

My brother, however, said that the religion and government should never be combined. I agree with him, but I think that religion in the first amendment is already so established that there would be dire consequences if it was taken away.

I’m not sure if I would recognize the first amendment if I heard it. I definitely didn’t know it before we went over in class. It was just one of those things that I knew existed and never saw fit to explore further. I feel like I have missed out on a lot of information as far as the government is concerned. I was surprised that my parents didn’t recognize the first amendment, especially because the jargon it is written in just screams constitution. I would say that this process would have been more effective had we read an updated/current synopsis of the amendment, but it worked well enough on its own.

First of all it felt deceptive and disrespectful to ask people if they would support the law (reading the first amendment) if it were considered by Congress. I seriously questioned if I wanted to participate in the exercise. I don’t think actually doing it changed how I felt about the assignment.

My roommate, a 42 year old male, recognized the 1st amendment immediately, saying it sounded as if it were word for word. He was heartily in agreement with it, totally believes in it…and the right to bear arms too. Wishes the broader sense of ALL religions were recognized. The right to redress the government for grievances is a very important part of the amendment.

Similarly, my 56 year old former husband recognized the 1st amendment immediately. He enthusiastically sang its praises, saying it is the “cornerstone of freedom and democracy; indispensible to being an American. He felt all parts of it are vitally important.

The 87 year old mother of a former boyfriend is a dear friend and sharp as a tack. Her memory is usually far better than mine when it comes to family happenings. She was frustrated by the language, asked me to read it several times. She adamantly stated I don’t think the government has any business sticking their nose into anything more. There are plenty of things that need attention now. In later conversation she complained that her high school granddaughter knows nothing of current events and swears they are not teaching anything about it in her school. I’m afraid her adamant feelings on the two matters made me feel like I couldn’t then tell her I had read the 1st amendment to her. I’m sure it was the old English language that threw her.

Similarly, my 45 year old male, college educated friend disliked the language intensely. He had me read it several times and then insisted that I say it in English. When I did that, he said it sounded like the constitution and appreciates the freedoms presented. I thought he had a good point about the language. How do we know it even says what we think it does when the old English language is so foreign? I got tongue-tied just trying to read it to each person.

My 28 year old niece is a high school drop-out and really had a hearty laugh when I asked if she would help me with my homework. However, on the second reading she was able to pick up some meaning from the words. She recalled friends making remarks about “free speech, you know.” Also, she had heard people talking about the right to complain about the government and to carry a gun. She felt this was a good thing.

My 56 year old sister said she thought she agreed with it. It sounded familiar. Discussing it in plainer language she was sure it was a law already, but did not know where she had heard it before. It was like it was hovering in her mind, but she couldn’t find the words. When asked if it were excessive or too much freedom, she seemed puzzled like she didn’t hear that it related so much to freedom. Then she said, one can never have too much freedom. We discussed how the wording almost made it sound like they were against religion, might be misunderstood as against respecting religion. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

Two were passionately patriotic, one very interested in current events and passionate about government involvement in our lives, but didn’t recognize the language of the amendment. It was too confusing to her. It is interesting that the one with the least education got right to the heart of its meaning, knowing that she’d heard her friends speak of something similar.

In conclusion I observed that whether they knew the exact old wording of the amendment or not, each was aware of its meaning and value in their lives. It was an interesting experiment, and it still felt deceptive and disrespectful.

This week, we are to interview six people, two from each of three age groups, and ask them these questions:

1) If Congress were considering the following law, would you approve it or not?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

2) Do you agree or disagree with the freedoms? Explain:

3) Which do you support, and which do you think are excessive or provide too much freedom?

4) Do you recognize this law?

I did not receive responses from everyone who I contacted, but the ones who did were:

• Three females age 50 to 55, one client and two friends
• Two females age 35 to 40, both are friends
• One female age 22 who is a co-worker

All of the respondents would approve the “law” as stated. The age difference did not seem to form any kind of patterns in their answers. They all support the freedom we have in our country, two within the first group spoke quite passionately about it, the other interviewee from the first group and the two from the second group agreed that freedom sometimes break into violence and the government should have regulations in place to protect their citizens. All of my interviewees recognized that the “law” is the First Amendment, except one expressed that she did not understand what I meant.

I was not surprised about the answers that I received. The First Amendment was one of the most important laws of our country’s and most, if not all, people should recognize it. Two out of my six interviewees are married to members of government armed forces (a former Air Force member and a computer programmer at an Air Force base) and I expected them to be passionate about our freedom. I was correct on one of them and the other respondent sounded pleased with the freedom that we have here in our country, but was not quite as passionate as the other one.

The mission:

Working alone, find  people from different age groups:

Ask them the following question:

“If Congress were considering the following law:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of ht people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

would you approve it or not?”

• Once you have read the “law” which of course is the 1st Amendment, ask your subjects the following questions:

1. Do you agree or disagree with the freedoms? Explain:
2. Which do you support, and which do you think are excessive or provide too much freedom?
3. Ask them if they recognize the law. NOTE how many identify the law as the 1st Amendment and if they did not.

The Responses:

Alaina (13 years old, cousin)
1. yes, because people should get to say what they want and believe what they want
2.i support free speech or of the press I think it provides too much freedom for press
3.it’s the first amendment

Starr (61 years old, mother)

Yes I’d approve it. Our country was founded on freedom – of religion as well as individual freedoms – and that should not change.

1. Do you agree or disagree with the freedoms? Explain: Yes, our right to choose how we each live our own lives is something that our country was based on and what our military fights for every day.
2. I think that our laws regarding aliens are too loose, or maybe just not enforced. If a person is going to live in the US, they should be subject to the same laws as citizens. If you don’t work, you don’t receive benefits, whether medical, food, lodging, schooling, etc. It’s only right.
3. Do you know if this is an actual law? Yes, it is a law, but again, not as well enforced as it should be.

Bryce (33 years old, brother)

1.  yes I agree with freedoms, it is what makes this country this country, I don’t however agree that we should be going out and trying to make the rest of the world exactly like our country, I feel that they should be on their own. Spreading freedom? let them figure it out on their own.

2. Which laws do I support? pretty much all of them, I don’t really have any problem with any of the laws in the bill of rights, the only thing that I see as a problem is the people who want to make a deal of them in either direction. take for example gun rights, it’s all crap, people who follow the law will carry the permit and gun, and whether or not they have a permit, the criminals are going to carry regardless. but because we all have a say, let them say it.

3. did I know it was a law, um, yes. I actually have a little bit of an idea of the constitution, unfortunately, most people in this country probably don’t

Duane (31 years old, former co-worker, friend)

1.  Do you agree or disagree with the freedoms? Explain:
I agree to the law. There are far too many variations and interpretations of various religious faiths (particularly of Christianity) to settle on a “true” interpretation. This is a democracy, not a theocracy. As for freedom of the press and speech, who is to tell us what can or cannot be said publicly? Without it, we would be an intellectually neutered culture/society where we cannot challenge or question authority. Those questions are what keep us pushing for new ideals and a pursuit of knowledge. Not to mention we wouldn’t have many works of literature, art, and movies

2.
All of the above have my support and I really don’t have a preference for one above the rest, they’re all rather important. There are safeguards in place for what might be considered “excessive” though. For example, you can’t holler “Fire!” in a crowded theater and we have laws for libel and slander. Nor can you hold a significant gathering (parade, protest, etc.) without a permit in some cases.

3. Do you know if this is an actual law?
It’s the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, hooray!

Felicia (72 years old, mother’s co-worker)

would you approve it or not?”  If I understand the above statement – I would not approve Congress getting involved at all in these particular rights by passing any kind of law.  Besides, why would Congress even think about getting involved with that? I think they have more important issues on their plate right now.  (don’t get me started….)

1. Do you agree or disagree with the freedoms? Explain: I agree with all of the freedoms listed above because that is what our country was founded on and having those freedoms is what has separated the United States from any other country in the world.  Very probably one of the main reasons that people do want to live here.
2  I support all of these rights but I do think that they are easily and too often abused and probably too much freedom for some people.  That is the key phrase…..some people…..and those people will do what they want and for as long as they want regardless of any laws.
3.
Didn’t respond to third question, because she believed it was not an actual law.

Wrap up: although we originally were supposed to interview six persons, only 5 responded to me within the allotted time. I find it interesting and weird that the oldest interviewee did not believe that the first amendment was an actual law, yet still she  wanted to support it as if it were a law. This means that 4 out of the 5 people I interviewed knew it was an actual law, even though all 5 supported the laws wholeheartedly.  I learned that I need to converse more with my mom about what exactly she seems that we as a country are not enforcing enough in regards to freedom of speech,press and religion. I also learned that my cousin doesn’t pay too much attention in school, although she identified it as the 1st amendment she contradicted her understanding of how the law is applicable to our lives.

In talking about content within the media, there is a key concept called Culture Jamming. As said on Wikipedia, “Culture Jamming is a tactic in which an activist attempts to disrupt or subvert mainstream cultural institutions or corporate advertising. Culture jamming is usually employed in opposition to a perceived appropriation of public space, or as a reaction against social conformity[1]“. There are over 50 different organizations and people that have used this practice, as the listed on Wikipedia.

A project that caught my eye was The Bubble Project, which was created by Ji Lee[2]. Lee went around posting 15,000 speech bubbles on different advertisements throughout New York City. These bubbles allowed anyone who saw them to write their own comments and thoughts in the ad. According to Lee, this engagement of people and the advertisement transformed “the corporate monologue into an open dialogue”[3]. These comments were then photographed and posted on the project’s website. Since the beginning of the project, individual efforts have sprung up in other parts of the world. Also, on June 1, 2006, Lee released the book The Bubble Project which explained the whole idea behind the project and shows some of the best pictures that resulted from the project.

This project turned out well as putting the speech bubbles on the pictures allowed interaction by humans to try to understand media. Humans always interact with advertisements, whether by looking at them, being influenced or throughly analyzing them. Though for the most part, most people don’t understand the true meaning behind them, just like Marshall McLuhan says that you can’t understand media till it’s in the past[4]. So by allowing the speech bubbles, understanding can start, therefore educating more people in what the media is trying to do. Add in the fact they chose New York City to do that, it opens the door for a wide variety of people to take part.

Another reason why the project also worked out is everybody has that bit inside of them that likes to do doodle. Also, for those who didn’t like a particular advertisement in the first place, it gives them an oppertunity to mess it up.

So if you’re not happy with something in the mainstream media, do something about it. There are different routes you can take and as shown by organizations and people in the past, they can make a difference around the world.
——————————-
[1]“Culture jamming -.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation Inc., 15 Nov. 2009. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_jamming.

[2]“The Bubble Project -.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation Inc., 28 Apr. 2009. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bubble_Project.

[3]Ji Lee (2006). Talk Back: The Bubble Project. Mark Batty Publisher.

[4]“The Playboy Interview: Marshall McLuhan.” Heim.ifi.uio.no. Playboy, Mar. 1969. Web. 07 Oct. 2009. <http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~gisle/links/mcluhan/pb.html>.

NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt Jr.

A saying goes that “money buys happiness”, in which that can be true to many people. Though with this saying comes the idea of over-consumption.

Famous people are a good example of the idea of over-consumption as they have lots of money and soon you find them buying lots. An example of a star showing this would be NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt Jr. For starters, he owns his own learjet (approx. $5 million each for top of the line as of June 6, 2008[1]) and a helicopter (between $250,000 to $2,000,000 in cost on avg[2]), though the argument is due to the amount of travel that he does. He also owns 14 cars of his own, including 3 cameros, 3 corvettes, a mini cooper, and one of the rarest 1965 chevys of all time. With regards to living, he owns a 140-acres of land (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/gallery/2007/s070111_dalejr/flash.htm for images of the property)  that includes a 2-bedsroom house on the property, his own little western town called Whisky River, a 6-hole golf-course, a go-kart track, and a house on the property for his sister, Kelley[3]. You then add personal spending he probably does and it equals to a high level of consumption. When looking at this, what about those that don’t have a lot of money? What about those whom are poor and can barely survive day-in-day-out? If you look at this idea of over-consumption, it doesn’t seem like a fair game for all parties.

This happens as people can’t stop thinking about what they own. This is something that John Berger reflects on in his book called Ways of Seeing[4] in where he talks about people and their paintings. People use to get themselves painted sitting infront of their house, or in one of their most elaborate rooms to therefore showcase to others what they own.

Though what you got to remember is that you have to set limitations. While thinking if you have to have that expensive dress or that certain fancy food, think of those who don’t have much. Maybe your money is better spent spreading the wealth around by getting what you absolutely need, yet helping those with less.

———————————

[1]Doug. “How much does a LearJet cost? And how much does it cost for operations and maintenance, ie fuel etc?” HelpGlobe – Ask Questions, Share Answers, Learn from Experience, Build Expertise for All. Helpglobe.com, Jan. 2008. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. http://helpglobe.com/answers.aspx?qid=438.

[2]Modeller_db. “What is the price of an average helicopter?” Yahoo!7 Answers – Ask Questions & Get Answers On Any Topic! Yahoo!7 Inc., 2006. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061210060922AAzESR7.

[3]Livingstone, Seth. “At home with Jr.” USA TODAY. USA TODAY, 11 Jan. 2007. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/motor/nascar/2007-01-11-earnhardt-jr-a1-cover_x.htm.

[4]Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation, Penguin, 1972. Print.

Image: Dale Earnhardt, Jr wins most popular driver award for 4th consecutive year. 2005. Photograph. ARS: http://autoracingsport.com. AutoRacingSport.com, 1 Dec. 2006. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. <http://autoracingsport.com/wp-content/uploads/nascar/earnhardtjr_headshot.jpg>.

The internet has become a place for sharing information, though it does have problems. Some information sharing can be good as it can create a flow of ideas yet sometimes information thats only meant for yourself to know or a small group of friends can be leaked out to other sources. Facebook is a one place where this is happens.

Most friends connect on facebook by discussing with each other by posting on each other’s walls. Facebook states on their privacy policy[1] that “you” control of your information with limiting what’s displayed in your profile to your networks. Though you may run out of control of the information your passing. You may have it blocked so only people you know see your posts and information, yet what if your friend doesn’t? Then therefore if this is a conversation you’re having with that friend and may be seen due to their settings. So in truth, do you have “complete” control as they imply? It doesn’t look like it.

Also in reading the Facebook Privacy Policy, a lot of people over look one thing – pictures. Whether you like it or not, when you post pictures on Facebook you are giving Facebook the right to use those pictures however they please. A case was one person had a picture of two of their children and then later on found it placed on an ad without their permission. Another person found a picture of their kid placed on an adoption site, saying start the adoption process for $1000[2]. This is something that is not discussed in the privacy statement. That is discussed on the Terms of Use page where they state, “For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (“IP content”), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (“IP License”). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it”[3]. So you control who sees it yet meanwhile it still shows up somewhere else due to this? Aren’t they backfiring their own policy? And with regards to the actual wording, how is a 13 year old suppose to understand those words?

This is one controversy surrounding information on the internet so the best advice to adhere by is always watch what you post on the internet as you never know what could happen with that information.
————————-
[1]“Privacy Policy | Facebook.” Welcome to Facebook! | Facebook. Facebook, 26 Nov. 2008. Web. 09 Nov. 2009. http://www.facebook.com/policy.php?ref=pf.

[2]“11-9-2009 Newscast.” CTV Nightly News. CTV. 9 Nov. 2009. Television.

[3]“Statement of Rights and Responsibilities | Facebook.” Welcome to Facebook! | Facebook. Facebook, 28 Aug. 2009. Web. 09 Nov. 2009. http://www.facebook.com/terms.php?ref=pf.