A Nickelodeon Pregnancy

I had to post this because of my recent project on the sexualization of tweens. Not only is Jamie Lynn Spears the younger 16 year-old sister of the infamous Britney, but she is also a Nickelodeon star (she has her own TV show, Zoey 101)--a network (and show) most definitely geared toward the tween market. And now she's pregnant!

Perhaps some good can come out of this, serving as a lesson to younger girls that there are consequences for having sex, especially at such a young age. But, on the other hand, the attention Jamie is receiving as a result of this news could further encourage young girls that this is the behavior that is rewarded in our society today. Either way, it is an interesting follow-up to my final project.

Logo, Pathos, Ethos, and Oprah

Oprah. One word and you know exactly who we're talking about. She has inspired a nation of people to read through her book clubs and in turn blessed many up and coming authors with success. Mere mention of a product on her show creates instant public demand for the item. She is almost solely responsible for the fame and popularity of people like Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz. Oprah is such a strong example of ethos she almost deserves her own category as the 4th rhetorical strategy.

What is it about her that we trust and believe in so much? Despite her fame, her millions of dollars, and her extravagant lifestyle, we still find it possible to relate to her on a personal level. She has put herself out there in her struggles with weight, growing up disadvantaged, and her painful experience of being raped by a family member as a child. By living her life as a strong single woman who has a career yet supports motherhood, Oprah also appeals to the middle-aged woman demographic of today, which contains a great number of people. By being "like us," we connect emotionally to her, and she recognizes the power of that pathos response. Oprah has gained our trust and admiration, and we take her advice willingly, much to the benefit of the people and products she recommends.

Now that she is offering her input to the political arena for the very first time, it will be an interesting exercise in the power of Oprah rhetoric. Does her endorsement have the power to transcend boundaries and create a mass appeal that will help elect the first African American president? Maybe we should ask Dr. Phil.

The W&M Tribe

My roommate, a William and Mary alum and graphic designer by trade, has been outraged recently by the redesign of the William and Mary logo (see above). Similarly to the way the UB logo was redesigned, the graphic design department at the college (where she used to work) was not consulted in any manner, resulting in the heinous use of an obviously upside down W (check out the incorrect slant of the middle of the M) and a student body that is terribly upset by what has transpired (see this article for more details).

In talking to her a little more about the history of the logo, I came to find out that the initial reason for the redesign was that over a year ago, the NCAA deemed the logo offensive and, therefore, unfit to use in athletics. Before I saw the logo, I imagined it being something similar to the blatantly offensive Atlanta Braves cartoon Indian head. Instead, what I saw made me a little reluctant to believe the NCAA's ruling (see below).

While of course I do not agree with logos that are offensive to any one culture or race, I couldn't help but think that this was by far the least offensive of the Native American-influenced sports teams out there. What about the Washington Redskins, whose name itself is a flat-out racial slur? Or, in keeping with colleges, the Florida State Seminoles, which portray the stylized head of a Native American man as its logo (see below)?

In my mind, there seems to be a fishy arbitrariness about the NCAA's ruling. While I can understand wanting to promote tolerance, if all schools are not placed under the same restrictions, then what message is really being sent?

Post Secret

http://postsecret.blogspot.com/

This site is one of my favorite exercises in visual/verbal rhetoric (and one of my favorite sites in general, for that matter). Every week, thousands of people send postcards into Frank, a Germantown, MD resident and artist, who selects some to post on his site and others to include in his books. While it does not encourage people to do any one thing in particular, it does persuade them to do one of the most private things--sharing a secret--in the most public way possible. I think that the rhetorical strategy behind the concept of the site involves the trust that Frank has developed in his audience through allowing people to post their deepest darkest fears and anxieties without being judged. Like good friends (which many people don't have), Frank and his community listen and include everyone without bias, promoting a feeling of trust that enables the site to maintain its popularity.

Frank does, however, play somewhat of a role in the creation of this emotion. While he shares some of the comments he receives about the posted secrets on the site with the public, he only includes positive messages, messages of help, or those that are similar to someone saying "I feel that way too." One week, he allowed all comments to be visible and it turned many people off from the site because a lot of people were critical of the secret-sharers, which created a sense of fear and anxiety in those contemplating sharing a secret. By carefully selecting which cards and comments to include, Frank provides the trust needed to make this site as effective as it is--it has even had the effect of helping a number of people who are in need of someone to listen, going so far to save the lives of some who are depressed and/or suicidal.

This site is also an exercise in juxtaposition and arrangement, as some of the cards carry different meanings when placed around others or arranged in a different way (such as the one below). The organization and arrangement of the postcards are also up to Frank's discretion, enabling him to evoke certain meanings through the way he places the cards on the site and in his books.

Curious George

I received this example of rhetoric in an email with a bunch of other images of children's books that displayed mischievously altered titles. The creator of this image obviously took something that is a beloved and easily recognizable childhood image (Curious George books), and by changing the title ever-so-slightly, makes a comment on the "absurdity" behind heightened homeland security. The altering of the familiar provides contrast, making it an effective rhetorical strategy for catching a reader's attention, and as a result, helping convince them of the intended message.

Pizza Tracking

I can't post this to the blog, but go to this link: ordering a pizza in 2010.

This funny movie was found on the ACLU's website. It's an obvious piece of rhetoric aimed at protecting the personal privacy and freedoms allegedly provided to Americans in the Constitution. Humor and exaggeration are utilized to show just how far the concept of a "national id number" could take things in the future. The extreme to which this video takes this idea effectively emphasizes the author's point that the ease with which a national id number might allow the government keep track of citizens is not worth what would be given up in the way of personal freedom and privacy, in addition to the threat of identity issues (i.e., theft, etc.) that could result.