I really liked the discussion of music in today’s podcast. Like we have previously talked about pop culture, music can often just be written off as entertainment that has no real value but the songs we listened to for today and the couple that Dr. Bezio brought up in the podcast, clearly shows that is not the case. Music can be used to comment on social or political issues, like with example we heard referencing opposition to the Vietnam War, as well as further a social movement, as we heard examples of music associated with the civil rights movement. Music can be very powerful because it can help us remember words or messages.

This was actually the first time I listened to Childish Gambino’s song “This is America”. I decided to listen to the song and watch the video before reading the accompanying article so I did not know what to expect. The music video caught me off guard from the very beginning when Childish Gambino quickly shot the person sitting in the chair in the back of the head. Especially since society often wants to think the things that represent America are positive, and the events of the music video are so clearly not. The music video as a whole kind of made me feel uncomfortable but that was the whole point. If we continue to ignore problems in society simply because they make us uncomfortable, no change will be made. Only by bringing these issues to light can we have public discourse on the issues that work to make change. A particularly shocking moment to me in the music video was when Childish Gambino catches the assault rifle and shoots the church choir. After doing the reading to provide me some context, I understand that this was supposed to reference the massacre in a Charleston church. I think this was a powerful decision because it is making the clear connection between the message of the song and real life events. While the song on its own definitely is still powerful, without closely listening to the lyrics I understand how it could be easy for someone to write it off as simply a song. This goes back to the importance of close-reading and analyzing pop culture because I am sure I have listened to many songs that are meant to have a powerful message that I could have overlooked.

I really liked today’s podcast about close-reading and how it related to the last podcast about storytelling in popular culture. All throughout high school I was told to closely read my reading assignments but my teachers failed to explain what they actually meant. This podcast put all of that into perspective. Now I understand the importance of close-reading and how it takes all of the little factors of whatever you are reading or watching to understand the overall narrative and messages. Understanding close-reading more clearly helped me understand The Yellow Wallpaper. While I have read it before, this time I was better able to understand the underlying themes that were written between the lines. While at first it simply seems like a woman discussing her life, marriage and illness, it quickly becomes clear the real theme of the story is how women used to be oppressed and treated in society. The author is continuously told what is best for her from her trusted doctor, aka her husband. I think a very important theme that I understood from the reading is the discussion of mental health. I only understood the theme of mental health further after listening to the podcast and how Gilman struggled with postpartum depression. This reading clearly exemplifies how mental health used to be thought about and how it was “treated” by doctors. These messages which used to be the reality of America have continued to influence how mental health is thought about by society. Something that I have learned in my psychology classes is that today the biggest barrier for people wanting to seek help with mental health issues is stigma. The continued relevance that the narrative of The Yellow Wallpaper still has today explains why this story and its messages matters.

I really liked today’s podcast about popular culture and leadership. It made me reflect about all of the popular culture I see everyday and how often I don’t think deeper about what I am seeing and just take it at face value. Even when we just accept popular culture at face value the popular culture is making arguments about the culture around us. To just merely dismiss something as entertainment would be to lose those important arguments that provide commentary on our society and relevant issues. For example, I had obviously heard the Robin Hood story before where Robin Hood steals from the rich to give to the poor, however, I never knew the story behind it, the purpose it originally served in its creation, or the impact it had on society. That opened my eyes to how storytelling in popular culture is a powerful tool that can be used to accomplish goals or unit a group of people together. Especially in today’s society where exposure to popular culture is at an all time high, it is important to recognize how the popular culture we view influences our social and political opinions through the arguments it makes and how it could be used positively to unite people together over common issues.

Dr. Bezio ended the podcast with the idea that the stories that we tell matter because they shape our imagination which in turn shapes our world which resonated with me. Popular culture has a massive influence on what we accept as normal and what we believe an ideal society should look like. Representation in the media is very important so that in our ideal society everyone is included and considered valued members of society. If the entertainment we watch reflects a diverse society, we will be more likely to emulate what we see and want to copy what we are viewing, as Dr. Bezio mentioned in the Harry Potter example. It is important as a society that we have a commitment to continue making entertainment such as Hidden Figures and Black Panther that tell an important narrative of the viewpoint of people who have been largely underrepresented in entertainment and popular culture in the past.

I found this podcast very interesting, specifically the discussion of the great man theory and invisible leadership because it reminded me of my leadership and the humanities class. It made me think about when we learned the concept of followership and how the definition has changed over time. Followership used to be thought of as an obedient act that was passive and lacked power. However now followership is thought to be more about critical non-obedience that elevates followers onto a separate and co-equal level with leaders since leadership is a collaborative process. Followers help advance leadership often by working behind the scenes to exercise upward influence that affects the change that their leaders with more hierarchical power get credit for. This reminded me of when Dr. Bezio discussed invisible leadership especially pertaining to the civil rights movement. While Dr. King and Rosa Parks may have been the face of essential parts of the movement, that does not discount the number of individuals who worked behind the scenes to plan the logistics, without which the movement would not have been possible.

I also liked the discussion on who controlled the history books because I believe we often forget that what we consider history does not capture the whole picture. White Christian men controlled the history narrative to paint themselves in a more positive light and the actions of the common people were forgotten because they were thought to be unimportant. It is important to use history to understand example scenarios of how people might react to possible situations but to not forget the bias that it was written with and does not entail everything that has happened.

I was assigned to watch the Democratic Party ads for the 2020 election. Despite the relevance of these ads since the election only recently past, I actually don’t think I saw any of the ads before watching them for this class. While I did follow the election, I was not watching cable TV or other media sources that was running these ads. Unsurprisingly a number of Biden’s ads focused on the current COVID pandemic, specifically talking about flaws in how Trump had been handling the pandemic. What I was surprised about was the number of ads where I felt Biden went negative and used something he said about Trump to elevate his own values or policies. While I recognize it as a valid campaign strategy, to me there just seems to be something a little dirty about going negative in so many ads but a common theme in recent elections. Also while I did not watch the Republican Party ads for this election, I can tell from the thumbnails that Trump went negative on Biden as well.

My favorite ad from the Democratic Party for this election year was the one that detailed Kamala Harris’s backstory to becoming Biden’s running mate. It starts off with a casual call between Biden in Harris where he asks her if she is ready to go to work. She promptly replies that she is “so ready to go to work”. Following that short snippet, the ad dives into Harris’s life story (told by her own voiceover). It details how she always knew she was born to “take action”, and how knowing that her race would cause her to be treated differently by some people her mother motivated her to change what she saw broken in the world. This lead Harris to became a lawyer fighting for an equal justice system, as well as fighting big banks in California as the attorney general during the foreclosure crisis. She says that she “has fought to represent people like her mother, people who politicians overlook or don’t take seriously” and she know that she and Biden are the right people to take on the job of representing all people, especially those who are currently struggling. I thought this ad was impactful because Harris represents many women in general and more specifically women of color who might have felt like holding a position of great power, such as VP of the the US, was wholly unattainable. While at the point when this ad aired, that was only a possibility for Harris, it showed that with hard work and a drive to help others that that dream could be a possibility. We have previously talked about how it is important to have people in the media who we we identify with and recognize as a role model in order to prevent from forming subconscious biases. This ad works to combat possible biases that people many have formed after having male presidents and vice presidents for so many years. This ad, in combination with Biden and Harris winning the election, hopefully shows many young girls that they have a role model this high up in the government and that job could be a possibility for them in the future.

http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2020/kamala-harris-vice-president-announcement

I found the Millennium Village Simulator very interesting and informative. At first I started with both Kodjo and Fatou having full health and allocated my hours to start making a little money off of the surplus of food I made. However as I started to try to adjust the hours I spent on the family tasks to make more money, I quickly lost health or did not have enough water or nourishment for both Kodjo and Fatou. Very quickly the simulation became much harder than I originally thought it would be, which I am assuming is the point behind the simulation. It is very hard to decide how to allocate resources when your resources are so scarce. I found it hard to decide what to spend my hours doing when my health kept going down and my maize crop was bad season after season. Additionally I found it hard to balance how much to tax the community and restrict certain resources, such as wood, when they were becoming depleted. At one point I realized that there was an option to attempt to have a child which I did not even consider because I was already struggling to make enough food for just Kodjo and Fatou and did not have a lot of money to spend on a child. Ultimately both Kodjo and Fatou died much quicker than I thought they would and it felt like there was almost nothing I could do to avoid it. 

This simulation made me think of my Justice and Civil Society class where we have previously talked about poverty traps meaning people who lack the capital to make an income which makes it very hard to even “get your foot on the ladder” to get out. I definitely felt that with this simulation. There was not enough hours for me to allocate to the various tasks to make enough money to buy helpful products and maintain good health to elevate the quality of life of Kodjo and Fatou and the larger community.

I found the topic for today, ads, interesting because they constantly are influencing us and our buying habits even when we are unaware about it . This is a point that Dr. Bezio makes in her podcast when discussing how ads are intentionally meant to target our unconscious ‘lizard brains’. This resonated with me because I often feel drawn to buying certain products even when I’m not particularly sure why I am drawn to them. Additionally, I used to be one of the people who had a preference for buying brand name products, over the store brand, even when they were more expensive because they felt more trustworthy for no good reason; this is a habit I am trying to break. 

The ad I chose for today’s blog was one in a series of Subaru’s “Dog Tested. Dog Approved.” ads. The various ads depict golden retriever dogs representing a family partaking in normal human activities, such as stopping at a rest stop, teaching a kid to drive, going to a local car wash, and more. The ad that I choose depicts two two dogs representing the parents dropping their puppy, child, off at their first day of school. The “parents” look reasonably upset after seeing their “kid” head into school, a feeling many human parents can relate to. I think these ads are particularly effective because dogs are a very popular pet with Americans so these ads can more easily appeal to a wide range of demographics and resonate with many people. Additionally since no humans are shown in the ad, it can appeal to many demographics, for example across gender, race, and age lines. I found it interesting now watching the ad back that quite literally nothing is said about the actual car, its safety features, or any other factors that are important to potential car owners. Subaru is counting on the appeal of the dogs to sell their product. Even though a dog driving a car is not normal, as a dog owner I know I always smile a bit when I see one of the ads. My family actually owns two Subaru’s, one of them being the car that I drive regularly, so I guess these ads do work or at least they did on my family.

I found the podcast today about statistics particularly interesting because I have previously discussed similar topics in my past psychology and sociology classes. In sociology we talked about how all statistics are biased and are being used by the person who is presenting it to accomplish a particular agenda. As the podcast went over we often trust statistics because we think they are scientific and seem rational but we need to dig deeper because not only the numbers in the statistic could be wrong but the way the author chooses to present or the reader chooses to interpret the statistic could be wrong or change the meaning. Even the census which seems like a neutral source of statistics can be used to accomplish an agenda such as allocating resources. So it is really important to be critical of statistics and not accept them purely at face value.

The graph I chose is similar to the example that Dr. Bezio mentioned in the podcast about how the number of people who drowned by falling into a pool correlated with films Nicolas Cage appeared in. My graph shows that per capita consumption of mozzarella cheese is highly positively correlated with civil engineering doctorates awarded. This is a spurious association because these two variables alone, mozzarella cheese consumption and civil engineering doctorates, are associated but either due to coincidence or another third factor. I chose this graph in particular because I think it is interesting that these two variables are seemingly so random and one would think that they should not show any association when in fact they show a quite strong association. The statistics presented in the graph are bad statistics and is an example of why one needs to be critical of the statistics we encounter and not accept them at face value.

Prior to this semester I was unaware of who exactly the Freedman and Ryland buildings were named after. I assumed like any building on campus they were just random donors or notable people in the history of UR. Unfortunately our school is choosing to honor a person who championed white supremacy, segregation and Black voter suppression, Douglas Southall Freeman, and a slave owning confederate supporter, Robert Ryland. While there is something to be said about not forgetting the past, there needs to be a better way that does not memorialize these people with very racist pasts. For example, as mentioned in class, there could be a plaque in the building that describes the history without making students in our commodity feel uncomfortable every time they walk by or have to go into the buildings. Additionally, the decisions that UR has made in relation to this issue of the building names is disappointing. To think that attaching John Mitchell Jr., a Black newspaper editor, would solve the issue and satisfy those who are reasonably upset is short sighted. Especially when it is difficult to imagine everyone changing how they refer to the building overnight just because the university updated the sign; unfortunately many will probably still refer to the building as Freeman Hall for at least the near future. In the case of Ryland Hall, even less if being done. To simply name a terrace after one or more of the individuals that Robert Ryland enslaved, seems like an insignificant solution. Especially considering that the building is currently undergoing massive construction, it would seem like it is the perfect time to change the name and start the building off on a positive note. 

Overall, I am disappointed by UR’s response concerning this issue. Unsurprisingly they are trying to please their donors and assure them that their names will not simply be taken off of buildings. However, to prioritize the donors of the university is to ignore the student body who is upset and wants a more significant change to occur. To remember history so we learn from our past mistakes and to memorialize those who have clearly done wrong and negatively impacted the lives of others are two very separate ideas that UR needs to recognize.

I really liked today’s podcast and the discussion on assumptions and harmful policies, such as those relating to drugs. Last semester I took a sociology class called Race and Crime where we discussed in depth how certain assumptions and biases are implicitly written into laws so that minority communities are targeted more and are more negatively impacted. Besides the war on drugs policies, discussed by Dr. Bezio, that led to a disproportionate number of incarcerated Black and Hispanic individuals, in my previous class we examined the presence of police in schools. Student resource officers (SROs) are brought into schools usually under the false assumption that they will protect the students and make the school more safe. However in reality, crime rates in these schools increase and as a result a school to prison pipeline is often formed. The SROs in school usually end up targeting minority students due to their biases, resulting in the minority students receiving unfair punishments, such as suspension or expulsion, for actions or behavior that do not deserve it. This also reaffirms biases into the minds of other students that certain minority communities are inherently bad and need to be policed more. While we assume that having SROs in schools is beneficial for safety and order, what we know is that policing becomes biased towards students from minority communities and can have detrimental effects. 

Additionally, the podcast made me think about how we make certain rules that are based on what is considered to be good or appropriate by the dominant culture in that time and place. These rules claim to be made for the good of society. The rule that Dr. Bezio stood out to me specifically, due to my own experience with this rule in school, was that women should not show their arms and legs because it is distracting to the men around them. In 7th grade, I vividly remember a school counselor meeting with all the girls in my grade during a lunch period to explain this very idea to us. That it was a bad idea to wear short shorts that exposed our legs or tank tops that exposed our arms and backs because it would distract the boys around us. Looking back on this, I think it is crazy that as early as 7th grade, 12 and 13 year olds, girls are being taught that the dominant culture puts restrictions on how they can express their bodies to make males more comfortable. The boys received no similar conversation about how they should try to not get distracted by the girls, placing the responsibility of this issue on the girls and forcing them to adjust their clothing. We need to do better as a society and not place the burden on women to significantly regulate their clothing choices or blame on women for distracting others because they are just expressing their bodies how they feel most comfortable .