Blog Comments

Post 1: Hey, Guess What? I Can See You... - Kristianne Diores
Post 2: Ads of the Past - Did They Really Say That? - Angeli Marteja
Post 3: Social Awareness Contradiction - Debbie Lee
Post 4: The Changing Face of Video Games - Sarah Brown
Post 5: Photoshop Manipulation on Hiatus in the Media - Caitlin Chang 
Post 6: Is Taxing Pop Really a Solution? - Stephanie Tam

Is Taxing Pop Really a Solution?

I think that this type of scare campaign would work. With advertisements like these, it creates a great impact on the audience. After watching the video, I would think twice before drinking a can of pop. Most of all, the video grossed me out and I think that other people who saw it would have the same reaction. Whenever I pick up or see a can of pop, I think I would think of this advertisement which would make me rethink whether I should drink it or not. However, I would also make excuses to myself, saying that it may not happen to me since I don't even drink it very often.

Although I'm not a big fan of pop or chips, I think that there are a lot of people who eat it regularly in their everyday life. For example, my little sister who is only 3 years old have already started drinking pop and eating chips. She drinks it whenever my other sister, who is 10, and I drink it. Whenever we tell her to stop, or to not drink that much, she would throw a tantrum and we usually just give in. She gets really addicted to it and she would always ask for more. I wonder if other kids do this as well.

Even though restaurants like McDonald are trying to make a healthier meal by adding the choice of apple slices and such and schools are selling baked chips in the vending machines, I think that most Canadians are still eating unhealthily. These actions to help people stop eating so much junk food which are bad for us may be a little too subtle.  I really don't mind the option of baked chips but others may complain about it.  Although there are some people who are trying to help solve this problem, others are trying to add to the problem we have.  No matter what, there are going to still be different types of food which are unhealthy for us.

If there was tax or a larger sum of money for something like pop or chips, I think that it may work for a while, but then after a while, people would get used to the price and think that its normal. I don't think that taxing is a great help in reducing the number of junk food consumers buy. I think that the video advertising the effects of drinking pop is more effective and efficient.

Photoshop Manipulation on Hiatus in the Media

I think that Photoshop is a great and fun software to use. However, many people have misused it in designing ads. Photo editors who distort our view of people overused it to the intent that the photo itself looks nothing like the original one. The photos might end up looking strange and unnatural. It bothers me a lot that companies who let these types of advertisement be published. I mean, who actually want to have hips which look as if it can snap by a touch? This shouldn't be done. They are promoting the wrong things and influencing the society the wrong way.

For example. in these pictures are before and after pictures of photoshopped models.  As you can see, they are already really thin in the original pictures but the editors decided that it still wasn't enough.  Using Photoshop, they made the models abnormally skinny - to the point that we can see their ribs and bones.  I think this is really unnescessary.   I mean, would people really look at these photos and say that its attractive looking at their bones?  I think not.  I think that it is really scary.  To me they both look really sick and and unhealthy.  I don't know the reason why they Photoshopped them this way.  If it was to SHOW how the advertisements these days are overexaggerated and over the top, I think it would be very effective but i doubt it.  I think the chances of that are very slim taking into consideration how other advertisements these days are like. 

I think the idea of using “normal” people as models for photos in an ad or in a runway is a really good start to help promote that everyone is beautiful in their own way. Personally, I think that using these types of models are more useful for advertising. If an advertisement had a very attracting person, the viewer would most likely concentrate on the model instead of looking at the product or message they are advertising. I think that using a normal person as a model would send a better message.

I think this type of advertisment is going to stay for pretty long - it is a new trend which many people would agree too.  Something with a great impact such as this would be really effective.  Since advertisements are the most effective when they catches someone's attention or if it's different and clever, I think that using normal people as models would do the job and also give the right message.  It kills two birds with one stone.

The Changing Face of Video Games

Video games truly have change quite a lot over the years. All video games are addicting but after a while, humans tend to get tired or bored of the same thing. I personally don’t have any experience with video games since I don’t own any (which is pretty abnormal wouldn’t you say?) However, I have played with them. I remember there was a time when McDonalds gave out mini video games for their Kid’s Meals. I had two of them but after a month or so when I beat the whole game, I felt that it was unnecessary and it became boring. I’m pretty sure the same thing would happen to other games as well. Most likely, the harder games would keep one more interested longer.

I have once played with online games such as Runescape. In the beginning I thought that it was cool and got pretty addicted to the site. But after a while, I realized all I was doing was the same thing over and over again. It became boring and soon I quit playing. After I quit, I realized all I did was waste a whole lot of my time. I mean, was there any benefits in killing monsters and getting a high skill on something? You can’t even brag about it to your friends.

I don't think that video games would ever be all beneficial. Even though games like Wii Sports are now developed, I think that they are still harming people. People still would get addicted to the game and not know what is going on around them. For example, there was an incident with a boy who jumped off the tree because his parents took away his video game. Video games can always do damage to people. Even staring at the screen too much would harm one’s eyes.

I think that video games are still going to be video games. Think of it this way: if games such as Cooking Mama and Wii Fit were developed and said to be beneficial for us, why should we pay over 100 dollars for it when we could just do the real activities ourselves? Instead of playing Cooking Mama over the DS, shouldn’t we go and try to cook the meal ourselves? Instead of playing tennis with a remote facing the TV, can’t we go with our friends and play a REAL game of tennis?

 

In my opinion, I think that video games are now just for the purpose of entertainment. All of the games which are said to be useful are just activities which anyone can do every day but has been translated to a screen with a controller. Personally, I think that video games are for the purpose of getting rid of boredom and not for promoting healthy benefits for everyone.  

Social Awareness Contradiction

I think that the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty really gives a hard impact to the viewer. It leaves them with something that they can remember. After seeing the video and the before and after images of the model, I think that the Dove Campaign is being very genuine towards promoting the “true beauty” of someone. It reveals the effects that a company uses to make an advertisement. By doing this, the viewers should come to an understanding that everything in the advertisements and magazines are not the true appearance. With extreme makeovers from makeup, lighting, Photoshop, and more, a normal person can be on the page of a magazine too. Dove gave the viewers the insight that everyone has is beautiful and that only the effects behind the scenes of advertising made celebrities look even better.

I think the Axe Effect Campaign is the opposite of the Dove Campaign. I think it is over exaggerated like the advertisements in the 50s and 60s. The video of their commercial made me disgusted. Is it really appropriate? To me, I think that the ad is inappropriate since not all girls would even like the smell of Axe. In grade three or four that the guys in my class would always spray Axe excessively. I think one reason for them to do this is because they think it was “cool” to use it. It definitely wasn’t about girls at that time. After seeing the video, I think that the Axe Campaign over exaggerate the effect of their product.

Well using the analogy that Dove and Axe are ‘siblings’ under the same ‘parent,’ I think that it’s not very surprising that the two are promoting opposite things but I do think that the parent company should take responsibility. Siblings aren’t exactly the same; they may have opposite personalities but they have the same care under the same parent. Therefore, I think that the parent company should promote the same cause but the two campaigns should just promote it in a different way. For example, if Dove promoted “real beauty” for girls, maybe Axe should promote “real beauty” for guys by using natural body spray. Even if the two campaigns are different, they should not be polar opposites like these two. The difference between Dove and Axe are to such an extent that it's unbelievable that they are from the same parent company. It is confusing for the viewers to know which of the two points they are really promoting – natural beauty or artificial body spray with illusory results? I think they could have different types of things they advertise but they should be more or less at the same topic.

Ads of the Past – Did They Really Say That?

 

1) Sanitized Tape Worms

My first reaction to this ad was: “What? I don’t get it – are they really advertising tape worms…to eat?” It doesn’t make any sense to me at all. I mean, do they have any common sense? The single thought of eating tape worms grosses me out. This ad just makes me wonder how desperate humans are to make money. I wonder how far the company was able to pull it off. I’m sure many people now would not even think of eating something which seems inedible. I doubt tape worms would allow one to become more skinny (like the ad indicates); but if does, then I’m pretty sure there are many negative after effects.

2) Tipalet

I think this ad shows gender inequality. The slogan “Blow in Her Face and She’ll Follow You Everywhere” makes it seem like women are slaves or pets. This ad as an appeal to romance but I think it’s just a false advertisement. In reality, I think most people can agree that smoke doesn’t have a very favorable smell. Thus, why would women start following men because they blow nasty, intoxicating, smoke into their face? Not to mention the health factors shadowing this concept.


 3) Lard

Who wouldn’t want a happy family? Using a picture of one to advertise something like lard is just wrong. Lard is fat. Pig fat. How is eating fat healthy? How does that make people happy? I think the company is taking advantage of the consumers’ lack of knowledge. The advertisement used the term ‘lard’ instead of something like ‘pig fat’ to trick people who don’t know what lard is. The innocent consumers might think that it is some wonderful new product to make families happy.

4) Camels

Intelligent people trained to save people from illness should know what is right and what is wrong right? Wrong. As seen in this ad, a doctor is advertising cigarettes. With the statistic that “More Doctors Smoke CAMELS Than Any Other Cigarette” and the slogan “The Doctor’s Choice is America’s Choice” makes the audience think that smoking the cigar would make them popular and belong in the “cool” club. Since the doctor also advertised it, consumers may think “well the doctors smoke too so it must be okay.” False facts like these would attract people to buy the product and also harm the people who use it.

I’ve got to be honest and say that I wasn’t completely surprised about these old ads. Advertisements are made mostly for one reason – money. Humans can be very greedy creatures. These advertisements are exaggerated, over-the-top, and morally wrong. I think that if the “Canadian Code of Advertisement Standards” was not introduced, providing rules that advertisements should follow, the advertisements nowadays would be the same – the producers wouldn’t know their limit. Although some advertisements do bend the rules, it is not as exaggerated as the ads shown above.

Hey, Guess What? I Can See You…

Wow! Google has yet again invented a type of application – Google Street View.  When I first realized this I was both happy and scared.  Since my family doesn’t own a GPS, I would say I use Google Map quite often.  When the new application was out, I found it very interesting.  At first, I thought that it would be very convenient since I would be able to see what the place I was searching up look like and look for eye-catching landmarks to help recognize it.  However, when I actually tried it, it took me quite a while to figure out how to navigate through the image of the roads.  When I tried to move forward or to zoom in, it went too far, and when I tried to look around, it started making me dizzy!  I guess things aren’t always the way they seem to be.

I’m pretty sure that no privacy laws are being broken (since Google would have taken down the application if they were) but that doesn’t mean that everyone feels comfortable with it.  Many people may think that this new application is violating privacy.  Mom and I are two of them.  When reality kicked in, I realized that MY house would be viewed by strangers as well.  Fortunately, when I searched up my address, my family wasn’t in the picture and surprisingly our car wasn’t either.  However, if our picture was there it would have been a different story.  As it is now, I don’t think it would violate any privacy.  This is because people on the road passing by or anyone walking by my house would see the same view – a normal two-storey house.  If, for example, there was a picture of me walking home from school, I would think that it would be violating my privacy.  Even though my face would be blurred, I think that people can figure out who it is.  A stranger might see a teenager with a backpack and possibly recognize my Mary Ward Uniform.  That is enough to locate where I go to school!  As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words

For example, the picture to the left is from Google Street View at the Kennedy bus stop near Ward.  As you can already see, there are some Mary Ward Students waiting for the bus.  Even though you might not know WHO exactly they are, you can recognize that they are from Mary Ward from their uniform which can be seen. 


In the end, I think that this new application from Google has more disadvantages than advantages.  Even though it may be more convenient for some users to see a picture of the location they are traveling to, I think that the privacy issue is a big concern.  I think more people would accept this application if Google decides to actually REMOVE all people and cars in the photos.  A new way of navigating through the roads would help as well.  Unfortunately, I think that it’s not very likely since it would cost a lot more and waste time.