The feminist communication theory is based on three criteria of gender, communication, and social change. All of which encompass and understanding of how communication and gender interact with the respect of assumptions constructed by society.

-The feminist communication theory is stated as explanatory because the theory itself is designed by experience. It is articulated by the experiences that individuals have and their perspectives involving the significance of communication in the every day rituals of females.

-It's political because the politics surrounding feminist communication reach a personal level. Women have been silenced and been seen as insubordinate in one way or another has been such a huge part of society's history that it cannot be seen but anything as personal.

-The theory is seen as polyvocal because it has been formed by many different female voices with many different opinions, philosophies, and morals which at times can be conflicting interests. Because of the all the different kinds of women with so many different experiences the theory has so many different perspectives to draw conclusions from.

-The idea of a true "voice" is when one as the ability to articulate thoughts and then in turn also be able to listen to what others have to say that may or may not be in conflict to your opinions and/or ideas. As I mentioned before there have been so many times throughout history when women have been denied the power of their voice and have been silenced and so women were forced to find other creative ways to express the communication that they were denied.

Deborah Tannen stated in chapter on genderlect styles that males and females think on two different levels and express themselves in very different ways. She used the really great examples of dialogue from the movie, "When Harry Met Sally" to better illustrate her point.

The following is a clip that defines certain stereotypes that define the differences men and women and who they are as individuals.

Racism in Society

In Stuart Hall’s lecture entitled “Race as Floating Signifier,” Hall discusses why race matters so much to people today, and how race works in one’s head, and the logic behind it. Hall notes that the meaning of race is constantly changing all of the time, hence the “floating signifier” aspect of the video. In the video Hall makes many valid points about race and how it has become almost a form of “human classification,” but one point that he focuses on in depth is his “politics without guarantee” theory.

One major point that Hall made with this theory is that society does not know how to conduct politics without guarantees, and that we have yet to find an ethically responsible way to conduct politics around race without the guarantee of biology. What comes out of this are so many stereotypes of people of color, such as their loud ways, their better ability in certain sports over whites, their abrasive natures, and so on. What Hall tries to convey in his lecture is how people of color have been fighting for themselves against these kinds of stereotypes throughout history, and that people need to take biology less seriously, and such stereotypes as blacks being less intelligent than whites that are not true, and need to be proven even more so, rather than being pushed aside, and instead finally be put to rest for good.

In the following video that I found, the boy discusses how one should “act black” in response to a question that somebody wrote to him and asked. The point that he tries to make in the video in my opinion is that there is no real way to “act black,” and that all of the stereotypes that exist around black people do not define them as people, just like stereotypes of white people or any other race of people do not define them or make them act in certain ways either. The thoughts that I leave you with are why do you think these stereotypes started in the first place, and what would it take for our society to completely abolish them for good and come together as one or is that impossible? And the second video is for your own enjoyment, because I believe that the lyrics really speak true to our society today, and how judgmental it has become, and how we really need to come together as one and stop the stereotypes and hate. Enjoy!

Stuart Hall Cultural Studies

I think the realist, linguistic, and Discursive position all play a role in Race. There are genetic differences in people, differences occur through our different languages and cultures, and through the systems of thought and language we use to make sensee of our differences. I don't think we can say that one position is more right than the others. Maybe its just how my system of thought and my language come into play, just like Hall said. I don't know if that is correct to call what I am and how i view race. I guess Hall is correct that we have different systems of thought that we use to make use of the differences, but then again everyone has a different system of thought. I'm not to sure what to make of his thoughts. I mean it makes sense, but what exactly does his ideas do for the world to see everything the same.



I picked the part of Do the right hting that Sut Jhally used in the movie we had to watch. Like him i think it shows exactly what these three positions mean and how the men in this clip use them. All of hte guys use descriptors that either talk about genetic differences, cultural differences and thought differences.

"...where I'm from, we believe all sorts of things that aren't true. We call it 'history.'"

For centuries the media has influenced the way society thinks and feels. However whether the media influences intentionally or not is another debate. Stuart Hall is a retired professor of sociology at the Open University. Hall is responsible for the communications theory of Cultural Studies. Although Hall believed that media does produce images that may at times influence society his theory states that the way a theory is interpreted is left up to the people. When I read the chapter I visualized Hall's theory similar to the human digestive system. The viewers eat the information that is being given to them and as they digest the body decides what to do with the "food." Is it believable and used to better the body or is it disagreeable and turned to waste? This is where the obstinate audience comes into play. Is the "food" operating inside the dominant code and accepted, applying a negotiable code, or will it be substituting an oppositional code?

It's not just the words we speak that can interrupted oppositely but it's also visual images or even people.

In the musical Wicked the Wizard sings a song to Elephaba about one person can be looked at completely oppositely by different people. Here is a video clip from the show and the lyrics so you can read at your own pace.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-WxYP3R1S8

http://www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/wicked/wonderful.htm

I still have one last question. Who is the person who decided what was wrong and what was right? What is true and what is false? And why have we believed them all this time?

Semiotics

Semiotics is a theory by Roland Barthes. Semiotics is the study of the social production of meaning from sign systems. In other words, it is the analysis of anything that can stand for something else (Griffin 323). According to Barthes, a "sign" is the combination of the signifier and the signified. The "signifier" is the actual image of the sign, as we see it through our senses. The "signified" is the meaning we associate with the sign. Signs carry ideological baggage/meaning with them, wherever they go. This ideological baggage/meaning is called "connotation" (Griffin 324).
The example that I found to illustrate Roland Barthes' Semotics is the well-known Oscar. The Oscar is the award that is given out at the Academy Awards Ceremony.

The Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnGtmKEPko4 (The embedding option was disabled, so you have to go to the site)

The signifier is the golden Oscar statue. The signified is respect. In the movie industry, if you win an Oscar, you receive a great deal of respect from your fellow peers and the public. The prestige-building Ocsar statue.

Semiotics in the World of Flowers

According to Roland Barthes, Semiotics is “the study of the social production of meaning from sign systems”, also known as “the analysis of anything that can stand for something else” (Griffin 324). Every sign in his eyes was a combination of a signifier (the physical form of the sign as we perceive it through our senses, also known as an image), and the signified (the meaning we associate with the sign (Griffin 325). According to Saussure, “semiotics tells us that we are always sending messages to other people and they are sending messages to us. But interpreting what these signs mean is a complicated matter” (Berger 7).



As seen in this video, there are many different interpretations and meanings behind roses and the different colors that they hold. Seeing as Valentine’s Day was somewhat recently, I thought that this example was fitting, because of how taxing it can be sometimes for men and women to interpret the meaning behind the different colored roses and flowers that they receive from others, whether it is on Valentine’s Day or not. I know that when I was in high school, around Valentine’s Day there was always a rose sale where one could send different colored roses to friends and loved ones, white, pink, or red, and it was always a challenge to decipher what it meant if you received one from a boy. I recall that if you received a white one it meant friendship, a pink one it meant I like you, and a red one it meant I love you, and yet it could not always 100% of the time be assumed that way.

I think if Barthes theory shows us anything, it is that different signs can really stand for a number of different things, and I think that is exactly what the above video fails to show. I know that in watching the video, I thought beforehand that a number of those different colored roses stood for different things then what the video said, but I think that is what the video does not portray. For example, I always believed that the yellow rose stood more for mourning and funerals and such, seeing as you tend to see them displayed so much in death situations, but the video instead said that the white rose stood for that. I think it is an interesting concept to think about, and I’d be curious to see what all of you think on the topic. What do you all think the different colors stand for? Do you think that they all have multiple meanings and can stand for different things, or can be interchangeable?

Media Ecology: Back in the Tribal Age

McLuhan's analysis of history places us in the electronic/digital age. He says that we are starting to revert to our original dominant sensor, which was hearing. I think that we are more in the digital age and are reverting to the "touch" sensor. People aren't necessarily talking on the phone, they are sending text messages, posting on line and using Facebook and Myspace. This is definitely the age of touch. There are some ways that hearing is still dominant, for one, listening and speaking work much better during team play on XBox live. Things that require speed are much more efficient using sound. The following clip is a history of how the cell phone is shaped. but the reason i picked this clip was to show some of the statistics is has on it.



This clip shows the transformation of the cell phone through the electronic age starting in 1985 and working its way up. This supports his claim that the hearing sense is returning and making us tribal again. However, there is this thing called text messaging. Around 1:59 in the clip one of the blurbs said "17 Billion text messages were sent worldwide in 2000. 250 billion in 2001, 500 billion in 2004, and 1.9 trillion in 2007... I think with the amount of texts flying around that we are not in the tribal age again, but we hit it briefly and are now in a completely different age using touch as our main sensor. We do it this with facebook and myspace websites, this enables us to stay in contact with people much easier. This new age is all about the words on the page.