This is just a drive-by blog post to pass you on to this article in Advertising Age, on the coming (and long overdue, IMHO) revolt against the negative portrayal of men in advertising. Glenn Sacks and Richard Smaglick explain rather effectively why it would be wise for advertisers to reconsider the standard ad portrayal of men as buffoons and idiots, because it's not going over very well with either the men they target, or the women who love them. I totally agree. I get so sick of seeing husbands and fathers portrayed as stupid, selfish, lazy, dishonest, incompetent, base brutes. This is just not the majority of men that I know, most of whom I greatly respect for their character, intelligence, hard work and devotion to their families. A little "truth in advertising" would be nice. I won't even start on what the men-are-pond-scum approach to advertising says to the boys who are growing up in the world today, trying to figure out who they are supposed to become as adults. I know we're a long way past the age of "Father Knows Best," but could we at least acknowledge Father Knows Something?
Hat tip: Instapundit
Monday, April 14, 2008
Men Are Not Idiots
Posted by
Kat
at
4/14/2008 11:53:00 AM
|
Labels: advertising, Glenn Sacks, Richard Smaglick, television
Monday, April 23, 2007
Weird Science
Here's a bit of fluff to start your week. Justin Mullins, at NewScientist.com, says that Phillips (you know, the TV manufacturer) is developing "Furry TV." Haven't you always longed for a pettable television? No? I can't say I have either. In fact, such a thing would never have entered my head, but apparently the folks at Phillips have actually been working on how to make it happen, and believe it should be possible to make a TV screen out of fabric, with hair-like strands acting as pixels. Ultimately this could lead to wearable television screens, and Mullins explains, "The company hopes to build furry displays into outfits." How weird is that?
I can "picture" it now--your favorite sweatshirt won't be the one that commemorates your trip to the Super Bowl, but the one that let's you watch the Superbowl. Of course, if you're watching television on your own shirt, instead of someone else's, the image better be upside down, and set somewhere down around your belly button, if you want to see and understand any of the action (which could give new meaning to the term "contemplating your navel.") Speaking of new meanings, this weird science could lead to a whole new set of vocabulary oddities. For example would a sweatshirt TV fitted out for the hearing impaired have "clothesed captioning?" Would a baby bib TV come equipped with a "video feed?" Would "volume control" suddenly have a double meaning--not only referring to turning down the sound, but maybe alluding to somebody's need to trim a few pounds so that they can fit into their wearable television?
I'm left wondering why Phillips wants to spend time and money developing this technology? I get the concept of developing flexible, portable TV screens; there are lots of practical applications, but what real purpose would clothing that can double as an idiot box serve? I wrote last week about how scientists are developing "electronic clothing for emergency personnel that can have updatable messages written across them in glowing letters." That I get, but furry fabric televisions sewn into clothing? That's too weird for even my extra-weird imagination to see the point. Anybody else have any "this is a great idea because..." solutions for me?
Posted by
Kat
at
4/23/2007 12:12:00 PM
|
Labels: bad ideas, gadgets, Justin Mullins, New Scientist, Phillips, science, Technology, television
Monday, October 02, 2006
Ramadan TV
I would not have expected to read that Ramadan comedy could involve making fun of Islamic fundamentalists, would you? Ramadan is the holiest month in the Muslim calendar; surely it's a time to all pull together and focus on the things all Muslims have in common, right? Well, it seems not, if this NBC News report, by Charlene Gubash, is any indication. According to Gubash, Ramadan is also the high point in the Muslim TV viewing year, equivalent to sweeps week here in the States, and the competition is fierce. Oddly enough, for those of us who aren't familiar with the television options in Muslim countries, not all the Ramadan viewing fare is "Islamically Correct." Gubash elaborates:
Interesting, eh? Saudi TV as a refuge for anti-fundamentalist satire? Who'da thunk? The article has a few more surprises as well, and other programs that might put a twist in your preconceptions--well worth a read. Moving on, Gubash's article led me to an Associated press piece which furthers indicates that Ramadan TV isn't all about pleasing the jihadis and Islamic fundamentalists. There's a Syrian director who's putting out a series for Ramadan that condemns terrorism, saying it hurts Muslims. One thing of note in this article is that the director blames the rise in terrorism 100% on the U.S., because we invaded Iraq and support Israel. (I don't suppose it would do any good to note the rise of terrorism before we ever put a toe in Iraq. I'm sure it wouldn't do any good to defend our stance on Israel. That would just be wasted breath.)An example is "Tash Ma Tash," a wildly popular Saudi TV series that is deploying satire to poke fun at the fundamentalists.
Staff on the show have received death threats for what some consider brazen impertinence; meanwhile, senior sheikhs issued a religious edict which deemed it was sinful to watch "Tash MaTash" after an episode skewered religious judges for working only three hours a day. Another episode was heavily criticized by clerics and others when it ridiculed the practice of requiring women to be accompanied by a male relative or a husband when dining out.
Regardless of what I think is a mistaken perspective on the source of Islamic terrorism, it's encouraging to see influential Muslims using the airwaves to condemn it. I keep reading things which make me think that the Islamic world can be extremely reasonable, despite what the loonies do. I read today that even the Sunnis in Iraq have largely turned against Al Qaeda, and are cooperating with the government in fighting that organization. Let's hope all these positive indications are a sign of things to come, shall we? I'm still having a hard time getting my head around religious satire in Saudi Arabia, but it's a befuddlement to which I would most happily adjust. I hope "Tash Ma Tash" wins Ramadan sweeps.
Hat tip: In DC Journal
Posted by
Kat
at
10/02/2006 01:28:00 PM
|
Labels: Islam, Middle East, Moderate Muslims, Ramadan, television
