You're Going In One Direction

I just want to share a journey with you. Just..just open your mind.

OK, so.You are going to type into Youtube "One Direction Interviews." Click on one, doesn't matter which, just pick one.

About 20 seconds into it, you're going to start thinking " Yeah, OK, these guys seem pretty down to earth."

You will then click on another. "...oh they have accents...they're kinda cute, th...they have accents...oh, that one has cool hair." *Nods* "Yep, I like these guys."

So now you are going to check out their music. You're going to watch a music video, "OK, yeah, these guys are reeaaaly talented, they can actually sing, it's kinda catch...Oh it's like, it's like he's..he's looking at me..it's like hes looking into my ey...He.is.so.pretty.

And then *Woop* *Snap* - You're part of the fandom.

Don't be scared guys, I was part of the hater club too - I went to all the meetings, I knew the secret handshake.

Just jump on the bandwagon now, we'll slow down for you, might as well do it now while there is some room left.

You should just retiree your old hater-mug where you've been sippin' on your Hater-ade...just,just get rid of it -we'll give some apple juice or something. 

OMG I LYK Luv 1d1r3cti0n!!11!!1 xoxoxox

Bird's The Word

Fan-Girling all Over the Place

"SHOT MEEE OUTTA THE SKYYY, YOU'RE MY KRYPTONITEE"

If you don't know what this is, please rush to Google and scrub up on your pop culture.

I was so complacent about doing a post on my obsessive fangirling, but I have conceded that we are here, we are emotionally unstable, and if I don’t get it out of my system I will spontaneously combust into a dishevelled puddle of ice-cream, Cheetos and despair.  As a side note, you should know this post, and the many more that will follow, might turn out to be less of a blog, and more of a 'convincing myself I'm not crazy' monologue.

I will be brief (I’m hoping that if I am, it will delay the sobbing and hyper-ventilation until later tonight.)  I am going to miss out on One Direction's concert next year. –Pause-  Due to their lack of interest/ my terrible persuasion skills, I now have 0 friends to buy tickets with tomorrow.  After selling my soul and any scrap of self-respect I had left after trying on clothes in Supre yesterday to actually scrounge up the money for the ticket, I was forced to admit defeat.  While I considered going by myself, and by God I did, I am not game enough to brave thousands of pre-pubescent teen girls by myself - I can think of nothing worse than inhaling kilo after kilo of glitter, tears, talc and Justin Bieber's “Someday.”

As for the actual act of ‘Fangirling,' my excuse lies in the fact that I am naturally a very, very full on person. Not in a clingy way, but in more of a ‘once I find something I like, I will give myself entirely to it’ sort of way. Its not a bad thing in the long run, you'd be surprised how much I can get done in a short amount of time,  however, the amount of emotional damage I can get done in a short amount of time is somewhat equal.

Expect a few obsessive posts in the coming days as I deal with my heartache.  The hope is that I will come out of my despair, unscathed, and able to move on with my significantly mediocre life.

Original Shots

Factual Story-Telling

You know how they say, bad things always happen to the best people?
I always thought that it was just something people said, like when dickhead kids die because they were being stupid, and their mothers come on TV and cry about how “sweet their baby” was, when really, he was the scum of the earth. But it's true, the best of us always suffer more than others, it’s a fact of life, it fucking sucks, but there you have it.

Alison was the epitome of the girl next-door. Raised on a sheep station, she took everything on the chin, her spirit never wavering.  She’s easy to imagine.

Now imagine her husband, with whom she had the first child, deciding that she alone was not enough for him. Imagine a woman brave enough to start fresh, with nothing but her pride, her son and the drive to solider on. 

Destitute, she moves to an industrial estate, where a man strikes up a conversation with her son. Peter, a man who had also endured the cruel sting of unrequited love, invites them to the beach.  As fate would have it, Alison’s family knew Peter and assured her he was as kind-hearted and gentle as I know him to be. In what seems like a fairy-tale ending, they soon married.

The fates however, were cunning; an eye for an eye as they say.

Shortly after, a son was born. Whilst in the womb, he had swallowed copious amounts of meconium - his stomach pumped three times to start his tiny life. Caden is now autistic. The stress of an autistic child is a stress very few can handle, even those as un-phased as Alison.  She took it in her stride, his mannerisms and tantrums saw him unable to reach milestones, boys his age quickly surpassing him. She learnt how to build him up, and redirect his focus. Scooby-Doo was his favourite.

Again, her tower of strength crumbled. Showering one day was when she saw it. The lump in her breast was an extremely rare and aggressive cancer.  In less than one hour she was pumped full of poison. Nothing was to be done, a mastectomy followed shortly after as did liver, bone and spine cancer.  Diseases that had killed her mother, had now come to claim her.
                                                                     ...

During her treatment, her first son Brandon, turned 18, a big event in any young man's life. To celebrate, the family came together, because deep down they knew it would be the last time.

In what seemed to be another vicious blow, driving home from the gathering, Alison’s father collided with a semi-trailer. He suffered a heart attack and died minutes before the collision. He was pronounced dead at the scene.  Just grateful to have lived to see her son turn 18, she received the news of her father’s death.  At long last, the eye of the storm loomed overhead. 

It was terminal, and she claimed her life insurance to celebrate. Most would have spent it frivolously, but she only wanted three things – a white picket fence, a shed for her husband’s tools and a flash car, a car she bought with no intention for herself. She later gifted the car to Peter.

People always say they want to attend their funeral, see who comes, see who cries, but no one ever wants to plan it. It was distraction from the inevitable. She bought her families suits and ties, picked her flowers and laid out her outfit - the day was closing in and she would have done anything to make it easier on her boys.

                                                                     ...

Soon, I would see her at Christmas; she didn’t make her jelly biscuits that year. Her long red hair was gone, replaced with wispy strands. To this day I regret feeling the way I did when I saw her, I felt ashamed, not of her, but of the fact that I was fine and she was not. Naturally, the family's grandmother died a week later. 

The storm was now howling. One night Peter found her,still, the stroke she had just had, incapacitating her. He called the ambulance.  She hung on resiliently in hospital for weeks, determined she would see her 41^st birthday and her son's 13^th. She did. The day after her sons thirteenth birthday, my Aunty Allison died. Death marking the end of her suffering.

                                                                  ...

I cannot bring myself to believe in God, a God who strives to love unequivocally, when fortune is gifted to so few.  A God that would administer blow after blow, with disregard for an entire family, is no God of mine.

When vicious series of events unravel, so, so, quickly, it’s hard not to regret every single time you looked at someone and felt uncomfortable,  and didn’t know what to say to make it ok.  It’s hard not to regret being so wrapped up in your life, you forget about another’s and it’s hard to live with the fact you felt so abandoned, that you couldn’t cry. 

Those jelly biscuits have yet to return to the Christmas table, the white-picket fence remains unfinished and Caden still plays Scooby-Doo, over and over.

The best always suffer most. 

Sex Between Soccer and the ABC

I honest to god can’t remember a time where my mind DIDN’T associate SBS and the ABC with those quirky foreign films with naked men, women dressed in 90’s sheek, and shabby crack-den -esc housing. My roommate has since informed me, in her very charming French accent, that this is not the norm, for the most part.

But the SBS and ABC aren’t just outlets for late-night soft-core, they are public media, and between it and commercial media, it seems to be the lesser of two evils. It is here that lies their difference.

‘The difference between commercial broadcasting and public broadcasting is the difference between consumers and citizens’           
                                                                                               -Nigel Milan

Unlike commercial media, public media audiences REALLY have a say on content (according to the BBC.)  Funnily enough, because of this, it is unfortunate that there is a lack, or no sign of, advertising because it means programming is on a tight budget - programmes like ABC news suffering the consequence.  The only real profit public media makes is from selling their content, which according to Bruce, can be anywhere from $75 per second. On the other hand, in an interesting turn of events, video is free through commercial media.

It is really is a hard-knock life for public media, with ABC once the sole source of content. When told this, I found myself counting my over-advertised blessings for commercial media, if I had no choice but to sit through every single episode of RockWiz I’d probably punch Julia Zemiro right in her god-damn face. I digress. Being the one and only, I suppose they built up a sort of reputation for being THE channel, and with the rise of all this immoral commercialisation nonsense, they have had to take a backseat, primarily in regard to the younger generation. This is despite the fact a supposed 12.6 million watch ABC TV weekly. It might be worth noting that, as discussed in a recent tutorial, these figures may not be a true reflection of the actual audience.

This is a pretty sad realisation seens’ as they rely solely on what WE, the CITIZENS, want.  Shouldn’t this mean, technically, that public media should be more popular than commercial? I don’t watch T.V nearly as much as I’d like so I might be out of the loop on this one, but is public media more popular? Certainly in terms of Triple J (which is nothing short of godliness), and web-based news (41% of Australians obtaining their news from the ABC.) It is nicknames for these channels that I feel indicate what is really thought about the content; SBS playfully coined “Sex Before Soccer.”

SBS is to Multiculturalism as the ABC is to Nationhood.  However, these core values can be questioned, the ABC’s  commercial sectors playing a big role in its organisation, BBC World wide and ABC shops to name a few. The problem is, even with all these definitions of what public media is supposed to be, it’s not, and now is more in likeness to commercial than ever before, in terms of government regulation of legislation, or rather ‘telling them what they can and can’t do.”

Despite all of this, Public Media does have its own news style, enabling public media to distance itself from commercial. It is the only source of in-depth political discussion, and in turn, political interview, radio news analysis and current affairs. Personally I believe the style of public media news is extremely well crafted, so much so, that it has continued to uphold its promise to its audience. 

The News is:
- Serious

- ‘Broadsheet’ style

- Importance over interest

- Considered, not quick and unchecked

Some nit-pickers however, have coined it:

- Boring

- Elitist

- Of limited interest

- Poorly presented

- Out of touch

They are trying to present informative news, not the Jersey Shore. However, to an extent I suppose they do need to:
- Become more relatable, to connect and inform the younger generation who have lost sight of in-depth politics, or don’t have enough access to make informed decisions. Engage with the democratic process.
- Overcome budgeting constraints and produce a higher quality in relation to news and what people want to watch.
-  To break the small ties with commercialism and become independent. Although they are not totally funded, they are indirectly restricted on content.

They have the right idea, but there is still much to do.

With Public Media comes community media, which seems to be the go-to outlet for beginner journalists and radio presenters. Bruce reminded us that by our second year we should have found placement at a community station like 4ZZZ. While this is all well and good, I don’t know how I would fare in a radio station, I have no interest in radio or television, SO NOW I DON’T KNOW WHAT TO DO, YAY!

In all, I've come out of this with the impression that there is a war between commercial and public, but honestly, as long as public media continues to make shows like this,

 

and commercial media this,

then I could care less. 

-Shannen

Original Shots

Original Shot

Judas

It’s no secret to my close friends and family that I yearn to live in America. Some ask if it is because of the famous people – probably, some ask if it is because America provides more avenues for success – yes. However, when I am asked if it is because I have idealised America, and all it stands for, I respond with what is an unyielding, no.   

America’s economy is crap, plain and simple, and the health system is even worse - these things make it far from an idealistic place to live, but what is more,  these things could have been prevented if its priorities were their people. America political choices are not only dangerous, but perverted. The main deterring factor for me, like most, is their involvement in the Middle East – an issue I feel quite strongly about. People might argue that the war is and was an attempt to prevent the spread of terrorism. I see it as a petty retaliation. What is worse, is that Australia deems it necessary to take part. Our nation has been lead to war by America; it’s been lead to social downfall, injustice and economic decline. To be fair, our country is not at fault - we have been misled, misguided like lambs to the slaughter.

At risk of sounding a bit dramatic, America, a nation once based on freedom, equality and economic leadership, is now a war funding, power hungry, tyrannical fiend. The George Bush administration, a flailing one at that, concocted a false struggle with the Iraqi people, a people with no naval force, no air force and no trained army. They claimed their war mongering was a response to the  9/11 incident, when in fact the most prominent nationality within the plane was Saudi Arabian. I believe this...man was disguising his greed for oil, and trying to cover for his premature clearance to the secret service already within Iraq. These are the actions of an egotistical man, who desperately sought an international display of power to detract from his weaknesses that included his inability to lead his country, his lack of intellect and failure to uphold basic civil liberties owed to the Iraqi people. Even though he is no longer in power, and America has come a long way since his rein, I cannot have faith in a country that would, at any point, support these actions, and drag other countries into their mess.

So why does Australia, insist on supporting this corrupt ideal? What has America done for us? They have assured us protection that, I will acknowledge, but protection from whom? We have yet to be attacked by ‘terrorists.’ Surely we are at more risk aiding them, or is it that we need protection from those who have sworn to protect us? America has proven to be untrustworthy already, ceasing 1.5 billion dollars foreign aid money in Egypt in favour of Israel, a known ally to America and its occupation. This occupation of Iraq, aided by this suspension of money was the result of suspected harbouring of Osama bin Laden, and yet 65,000 troops were deployed in 2009, an enormous increase from the original 9,500 in 2003 for the purpose of eliminating only 5,000 insurgents. The past is the past, but it is these actions in the past that have consequences today, and that are not easily forgotten.

I doubt the war we have been cunningly led to is something that the Australian government envisioned. Always in the shadow of America’s cloak, our country suffers as do those in the Middle East. Our soldiers toss families into the streets, when families in Australia already there. Our soldier’s kill and control on command of America, when Australia crime rate is still way too high, and yet we continue to solve matters in which we have no invested interest, 13,386 kilometres away. Since occupation of the Middle East, 32 soldiers have died; and several more have been injured by our countries insatiable thirst for America’s approval. Whether approval is another 32 deaths or another 2.2 billion dollars for weapons better used to eliminate illiteracy or solve the housing crisis. This cost of human life and safety has perverted morals we, as a nation, have clung to. Mateship, pride and intolerance have been twisted into a financial whirlwind that has been detrimental to our society and our reputation. The United States Government are a people of same circumstances who have continued to ignore these moral values in favour of a blood-stained profit.

“The enemy is people we know very well and people we can identify with, the enemy is a system that wages war when it is profitable.” 
                                                                                 - James Madison, War Veteran.

This got a little heated, my apologies. I do have a personal investment in the war, it would not have been appropriate to be as opinionated as I have, without reason. I would also like to make note that I’m not implying everyone in America is evil, I am simply saying that the government, was, and still is to a certain degree, corrupt and have yet to set their priorities straight. I simply don’t approve of their set of ethics when it comes to war, and the almost, exasperated effort, to pull the army out.

For too long has America deceived us, his flock like a shepherd, leading us toward a mirage of water. For too long he has gathered the lambs with his crook, and carried them in his cunning bosom, and for too long has he gently lead those that are with young. A true wolf in sheep’s clothing.

-Shannen

Commercialisation

"The ‘first duty [of the media] is to shun the temptations of monopoly. Its primary office is the gathering of news. At the peril of its soul it must see that the supply is not tainted. Comment is free, but facts are sacred."  - C.P.Scott

Somewhere off in the distance Channel 9 is screaming “YOU CAN TRUST US,” Channel 7 is insistent that we are some sort of creepy digital family, and  all  I can muster up in the face of these  ploys is a big and extremely eloquent, “Righto.”

These painfully corny slogans come off as a little patronizing, because while they are reassuring us that they are a sure source of the truth, somewhere deep down we already know they are consumer-driven pigs, much more interested in “the bacon” than the truth. These companies have infiltrated just about every medium you can think of, whether it is television, movies, radio magazines, or the web; with this comes a certain degree of social responsibility – a responsibility that’s been neglected.

The form of commercial media means it is either funded through subsidising, subscription or sponsorship.  Of these three, government subsidising, is the most concerning.  If you own, or contribute to a cooperation, you hold weight of opinion and oversee the direction or content of the company. Now, imagine our programs being run by the government, all the “questionable content” taken out.  It’s pretty bleak.  There would be nothing left, because everything is questionable- thus, there is no truth left but the governments (cough).  No trust can be developed between the channels and the audience in this instance.

The truth is not only being edited by government bodies, it is also suffering at the hands of tabloidization. The truth is being ‘dumbed-down’ for the general public, shows like A Current Affair, that once were the epicentres of truth, are stooping to new lows, headlines  like “Lindsay Lohan’s Dad’s Cousin’s Drug Battle,” is sadly prevailing over hard-hitting news. This blatant attempt to widen their audience increases advertising, and probably makes us all a bit dumber.

This translates to more general entertainment too, if cooperation’s don’t make things more accessible to a wider audience, there is a loss of revenue, which in turn means less investment and less income for quality products. Subsequently, channels source bought-in content, this perhaps explaining channel 11’s shrine to wildly-unrealistic shows like MacGyver and The Brady Bunch.

In all fairness, us as consumers are just as bad as the big companies. We are the ones who buy into all this ‘reality’ TV and entertainment news crap – we are more or less shallow when it comes to programming.

However, there is light at the end of the tunnel, news outlets like The Global Mail are attempting to combat commercialisation, brave claims like “our audience is our only agenda” gives me hope for a world where money does not outweigh quality, and for that matter, trust.

In all honesty, greedy companies should spend less time sticking their trotters in absolutely everything, and should instead stop fix the real problems like consumer ethics, and why Sunday programming is absolute crap. 

-Shannen

The Sound of Radio

I had this great idea to present a Lecture 5 reflection to you through sound, and while this would have been really cool, I did some soul searching and realised I can’t actually stand to listen to myself speak, so.

Dragging my bleary-eyed self from bed this morning after a long night/morning of watching: http://www.youtube.com/user/thefashioncitizen, I realised I had yet to listen to the sound lecture.  As my coffee and I grudgingly sat down in front of the laptop, I knew we were both going to have a terrible time. I could not, for the life of me, concentrate. Without any visuals to keep my eyes occupied, I was desperate to rest my eyes on something, but there was nothing that ‘matched’ what Carmel, Richard and Steve were discussing. Quite irritated and frustrated that I couldn’t focus, I felt the need to substitute the lack of visual with content I sourced myself. In the end I found myself scrolling through Wikipedia profiles of the speakers, just so I could match the voice with a face and create some sort of connection.  This was a matter of concern.

Although concerning, it was not surprising, my media use diary already indicated my zero tolerance for radio.  However, I imagined that if I ever started to listen to radio again, it would be super easy. I was wrong.

Coincidently, the sound interviews were actually about how to communicate effectively cross-sound. Despite the intriguing points made by both Richard Fidler and Steve Austin, the only thing that struck me was there belief that radio is the more intimate media. I am extremely undecided on this notion, part of me couldn’t disagree more, based on my inability to focus, but the other part can certainly see why. I indeed agree with Richard that radio is a very different medium to television. While this is the case, I found a point of his very interesting. When mentioning how both television and radio draw an audience in, he said that when we decide on what to watch, it is very much a process of, “nah, nah, nah, oh yeah” (in regard to channel surfing), meaning the images on the screen need to be powerful enough for us to drop the remote.  In my opinion, radio seems harder, getting inside the listeners head calls for cunning and extremely interesting content (handpicking ‘interesting’ interviewees and pre-interviewing them to assure they are valuable etc.) However, to be honest, I don’t have time to be persuaded by radio, in the words of Steve Austin, “we are time poor,” and I’d say this is why I am out of touch.

I digress. To get back on the topic of telling stories via radio, Richard provided some useful information for us young journalists:

- You won’t get anything useful if you relentlessly prosecute.
- Use humour to lighten the mood.

Steve on the other hand seemed to be in favour of the prosecution method, finding it more pertinent to expose the fakes by twisting questions until you get what you want.  This is how his program intrigues people to pick up the phone, by posing open questions regarding things that frustrate people, and in turn, get a quick response. Essentially, he believes this response comes about by human-orientated stories, and striving to find that human experience. 

It’s also worth noting that both men stressed that listening implies respect and that being able to witness a story unfold, as though the interviewee has entirely forgotten they are on air, is something of magic.

Despite my troubles concentrating, I believe the content of the lecture has embedded in me a set of invaluable life skills, everything from not “doing anything on radio that you wouldn't do in life” and avoiding the treacherous “ideological ghetto.” Essentially, it’s all about what the audience needs.

-Shannen

Gangster Nancy Sinatra

We are talking pictures here people!

“If it makes you laugh, if it makes you cry,if it rips out your heart, that’s a good picture."
 - Eddie Adams

This quote sets the tone for Lecture 4.

Bruce began the lecture at the most logical starting point, beginning the history of the image with French and Australian Indigenous cave-art. Their story-telling value justifies there importance in this photo-journalistic movement. Subsequently it was pertinent to mention Plato’s “shadow on the cave wall theory” and how it translates to modern day conventions of television.

Religion, surprise surprise, has not only been part of every integral moment of history, but it has also dipped its toes into the picture movement – with biblical stories translating onto the stained glass windows of cathedrals, and ornate depictions of religious figures ever-present between the pages of the bible. The intricate or “illuminated” lettering of biblical text is also worth noting. These books and drawings perhaps spurred the format of, what I believe to be the most timeless form of picture, the newspaper, what with early 1860’s news techniques relying heavily on line-drawing to communicate feeling and images cross-text.

Photography, in the actual sense of the word, began for journalism in 1879, “Steinway Hall” becoming the first published photo in the Daily Graphic. Shortly after in 1880 “Shanty Town” by Henry J. Newton became the first published news shot, it too being featured in the Daily Graphic.  Despite this historical achievement, it would not be until much later that any breakthrough in photography would take place, the Scottish Daily Record and Mail publishing the first photo in “Natures Hues” in 1936, an event that to this day holds significance.

With man’s increasing knowledge and need to improve, comes both the rise and decline of innovation. While iPhones, iPads, web galleries and digital imaging are increasing the overall news-value, there is now an expectation that these images are of a higher quality. In regards to some media outlets, ‘high quality’ quite literally translates to body disfigurement. 

If people refrained from photo shopping absolutely everything, photography’s name might not be dragged through the mud so often.  Warping images of women to resemble the unequivocally and fundamentally perfect, Kim Kardashians of this world, is abusing the potential power of a picture.

Despite man’s failure, there are some who continue to take photography seriously, who try and capture an image that indeed says a thousand words.

Attempting to sift through some of the world’s best photo-journalism, I couldn’t, so I scrounged up this video: http://vimeo.com/33983706

Moving on. Somewhere deep down I knew there had to be some sort of technique for photography, simply based on the fact that… not everything looks good. Thankfully, Bruce provided some answers: Framing, Focuss, Angle,Timing, Exposure, perhaps the inclusion of a sound dimension, and most notably: The rule of thirds. 

 All the technique in the world doesn’t compensate for the inability to notice
- Elliot Erwitt

Now, while I agree that these techniques are the foundations of photography, and we should most certainly keep them in mind, I would much rather like to think that photo-journalism is something that you can just do, something that you don’t have to be analytical about; it can be boiled down to plain old  perseverance and luck. It just seems a little more magical, I guess you could put it, than something that can be calculated. This idea that you can take one good photo, on a whim because you were in the right place at the right time, is something I’d very much like to hold onto- not because I am stubborn, but because I doubt the great photographers of every period, in the heat of the moment, sat down and had a think.  In hindsight, I suppose it’s based on experience, as though it is so innate that they can’t help but get it right.

This isn't to say something like this, that I took on the spare of the moment without thinking, is appropriate. This is because an image needs to be somewhat calculated and have context. Just because it’s focused and you can clearly see it’s a plant, doesn't give it any meaning. 

Something like this however, is an example of someone who just plain and simple, got it right.

Leni Riefenstahl, who some might call "Hitlers side-kick" reiterates my point.

"In 1934 people were crazy and there was great enthusiasm for Hitler. We had to try and find that with our camera"

She talks as though photo-journalism is an adventure, and the perfect image isn't pre-determined, you have to go looking. Admittedly, she was backing the wrong guy, but she was brilliant none-the-less. If she could make a monster look ethereal, she could probably knows what shes on about.

-Shannen

Original Shots

Phototention

Finding it increasingly hard to personalise this blog, I’ve dug deep and realised that people have an array of interests, and trying to narrow down content is just way too hard. As of now, this blog will be a dumping ground for; all my complaining/ being overly invested in things that have nothing to do with me but I still feel the need to comment/ experiences/ interests. I have been at it for a solid 18 years, so I shouldn't be too bad at it. 

Girls who insist they are unattractive online, honest to god make me so angry that I could actually hurt myself. What gets me is that they aren’t denying it because they are modest - it’s some sick twisted plot to boost their self-esteem. There can be absolutely no explanation as why they upload “ugly” photos of themselves on Facebook entitled “lol I’m such a dog” when they have clearly spent the entire day putting on makeup and straightening their hair – unless they are so bloody unhappy with themselves that they have resorted to seeking approval from their online peers; whether this ‘approval’ be, being praised for looking a certain way, or acting a certain way. I’m going to go out on a bit of a tangent here and extended this hatred to girls who upload photos of themselves in bikinis (who for some reason think because its lycra, its more appropriate than cotton underwear), smoking and drinking. All of this begs the question: how and why is this photo uploading movement so damaging/annoying? The most obvious examples are exemplified on new media.

Tumblr is the overlord of this egotistical, narcissistic spiral of teenage angst, dip dyed hair and skimpy denim ‘shorts’. Tumblr provides what some might call a ‘teenage girl’s guide to being hot.” These Tumblr girls, who mind you are 20-somethings, pride themselves on taking cool photos of themselves with 0 body mass and a permanent swirl of what I can only assume to be cigarette/marijuana smoke around their face.  It is beyond me why this is something to strive for. This online trend is permeating into day to day life, only a few weeks ago I witnessed a girl compliment another by saying “you are so skinny and pretty, you should be on Tumblr” – and now I am going to strangle them with their own oversized jumpers and ripped stockings.  

It is my understanding that, looking like a Tumblr girl in some teenage circles, is desired.  Hence, if you take a photo of yourself in the vein of Tumblr, you’re a hot bitch.  However it is the content of  SOME Tumblr posts that is extremely detrimental to a teenage girl, adding on to the already long list of insecurities, fears and battles with body image. Tumblr heightens all of these things, in what is just another burden to bare for the new generation of teenage girls in this technological world.  In some ways this is quite unfair, back in the day the only things that could crush our self confidence and ‘cool’ factor was The O.C and mum’s magazines, but now, there is this whole new onslaught of media in which to hand-pick your issues. Tumblr is a sure fire way to attain body issues…and to become super cool. It’s focus on drugs and  skinny or thinspo (thin inspiration) posts  is probably not so great, and my best bet is that it has in some way contributed to body/self -esteem issues. Whether they are genuine is beyond me - But rest assured, these issues are represented in the most glamorous way possible.

Despite how charming these photos are, they are appealing to the eye. However, even though they represent terrible things, I cannot for the life of me, take them seriously.

http://skinnygirlstastebetter.tumblr.com/

To me, whoever made the page comes off as immature – so much so its passed over into the realm of embarrassing. If the content is real, then it is very concerning. If it isn’t, the only purpose it serves is to inspire body issues. While is human nature to seek approval, image wise, creating entire platforms or uploading photos of this crap to achieve it, is just sad.

People have said it before, and I'll say it once more: Media is the problem.
If there weren’t so many mediums on which to praise skinny celebrities for their clothing or their fad diets, the girls who upload these images would spend less time mulling over what they should look like. Instead, I imagine they would be playing hopscotch, dating boys and emotionally beating each other down the old fashioned way, by bitching behind each others backs- like normal teenage girls.


- Shannen