Celebrities = Popularity = Support

What do you see when you look at this picture? Well for me I see the Golden Globes. Then I see Kathy Griffin. Then I see the "NO H8" painted on her face. So, I saw the celebrity before I saw the organization's logo, or advertisement. Kathy Griffin did her job. She brought attention to the NoH8 campaign.

It is very common for non-profit organizations to reach out to celebrities to endorse their cause. In a society that is so focused on celebrities and tabloids it is a smart move to gain popularity and, more importantly, support.

Let's go back to the picture. Adding Griffin's Golden Globes proves to the audience how successful she is. Her success means she has a large following, and once they see that she supports a certain cause they may also decide to support it.

The NoH8 logo on her face has one red number. This is because their campaign focuses on marriage, gender, and racial equality. Proposition 8 was the bill passed in California that amended the ban of same-sex marriage. The attention brought to the 8 by its contrasting color makes the audience wonder why it is different. This curiosity will lead to more research and what the organization hopes will be more supporters.

Using celebrities is truly a successful strategy for non-profits. Yes, it is risky, but the outcome is usually worth it. What are your thoughts? Are you more drawn to causes with celebrities who support it?

Did Livestrong Live up to its Name?

I chose the article “Livestrong Offers Lesson in Mitigating Celebrity Risks” by Rodd Zolkos. To determine if this was scholarly I researched the text that it was published in. Business Insurance is a recognized magazine published for executives in the business industry to educate fellow industry members on risks and management strategies. Zolkos’ article was peer edited by fellow business scholars which makes it a credible, scholarly source.

This article addresses how the fiasco created by Lance Armstrong shows the risks of having celebrities endorse non-profits. Zolkos states that many organizations use their celebrity allies to get their cause in the public eye but often start to separate themselves after they’ve created a name for their organization. It is necessary for the non-profit to build up a successful support staff and board of members so they can survive a potential fall from grace by their celebrity endorser.

The article gives insight into how non-profits can avoid losing their organization because of the dangers of enlisted celebrity help. It does create a successful message by showing how playing on the audiences emotions can be detrimental to the success of the organization. The goal is to attract support through a popular celebrity but if they become unpopular to the public this could be negative to the organization.

Do you believe celebrities have a negative or positive impact on organizations they endorse?

Is Selfless Service Always Selfless?

You see it all the time in the tabloids, on the news, and in the media: celebrities giving their time to serve others in need. Whether it be in a soup kitchen in the hardest parts of downtown, or a refugee camp in a country in Africa most people cannot point out on a map, it seems as though every time a picture has to be taken to prove this good deed.

I am not saying that every time you see a picture of an individual of celebrity status with a group of children at a foreign orphanage it is a hoax to make themselves look better. I do believe that the majority of people go out of their way to provide to those in need out of the kindness of their hearts. I stand by my statement that these photo opportunities are taken in part so a singer or actor can prove that they are more than simply a talented, pretty face.

So why does this bother me so much?

Like I have said in another post, I plan on saving the world. It breaks my heart to see people who use others in need to lift themselves up and enhance the image that others have of them. This is not just celebrities, this is also ordinary people. I care so deeply about this issue because it holds so much importance in my life.

How do you think this glamorization influences the non profit world?

Odd Jobs Really Do Come in Handy

Since we've been discussing "work" recently in class I figured I would address this topic. I don't plan on  arguing about working conditions, or low wages. Let me tell you about my work experience- it's actually a little humorous.

When I was twelve I got a job cleaning tables at an ice cream shoppe. That's right, I was twelve. Definitely illegal but nonetheless worth it. I was trying to raise money in order to go to Australia with my soccer team so being an illegal employee seemed like the best option. What did I learn here? Well, I did not want to be a permanent part of the ice cream industry and I wanted to stay in school so I wasn't washing tables for the rest of my life.

Then came high school. I was now able to be on the official pay role so it became easier to get a job. Keeping one was my issue. I started out as a sales associate in a toy store. This was less than enjoyable due to my lack of responsibility in the store and my desire to do more than break down boxes and rearrange stuffed animal puppies. I understand that we all have to start somewhere but as a junior in high school I quickly realized that I would not be trying to become a fixture in the small business community. Funny thing is that I remained with small businesses until I graduated high school.

I went back to an ice cream shoppe for a summer until I moved to Texas for school and the experience was great- when I wasn't hounding my boss to actually pay me. I got to work with some of my best friends and got to eat ice cream regularly so as an 18 year old, recent high school graduate this job was perfect for me. This ice cream shoppe was strictly seasonal so when I came back for winter break I had to look for other options. I became the sample girl and a local cookware store. I baked chicken with their specialty glazes, stuffed olives with somesort of cheese mixtures, made cheeseballs and dessert dips, you name it, I probably had to cook it at some point. This is where it gets interesting, though. I didn't like to cook then. Better yet, I didn't know how to cook. I didn't even know how to bake chicken in the oven. When I ruined one of my bosses expensive pans by scorching it with burning meatballs I realized I wouldn't be a professional chef.

Now I'm at my current job. I'm a student manager for the University Center Hospitality and Events department here at A&M. I don't plan on being an event coordinator or event planner, but I love my job. I get to interact with people everyday, I have positive relationships with my supervisors, and I get to help at huge events like wedding and galas- I love weddings. This job has taught me how important it is to keep great relationships with my bosses because they can ultimately make or break my experience as an employee. I also know that I would rather not answer phones for a living and take reservations.

I consider myself lucky to have had so much experience with different jobs because it has helped me realize what I want and don't want in my future occupation. What odd jobs have helped aid in your decisions? What have you learned from your work experience?

Conflicting Voices

I cannot imagine having to cycle through different languages in my head on a daily basis. I have been raised speaking English at home and at school and I am not fluent in any other languages. The schools I have attended have never had a large minority population so I haven't experienced other languages through my classmates either. I would like to clarify that I am still culturally aware and have been enrolled in Spanish classes for years, so I'm not completely in an English bubble.

Writing is a struggle for many people due to their inability to successfully convey their points and opinions onto paper. Personally, I will talk your ear off about a topic but I find it hard to do the same through writing. The added stress made by having to decipher between two languages would do nothing but overwhelm me.

My voice at home and at school are not very different but there are some difficulties when I am trying to compose an academic project or paper. I'll be honest, I do not have a very advanced and colorful vocabulary. If I win an argument, it is certainly not because of all of the big words I use. This is partially due to the lack of importance a wide vocabulary has in my household. I'm not complaining, though. Growing up I never felt inferior because I did not understand what my parents were saying, and I am very thankful for that today. I do struggle, especially in high level classes, to reach the level of language that many of my peers have. This has made me have to enhance other aspects of my writing, along with add to my less than extensive vocab list.

Although I do not have to fight through competing voices, I do have to fight through a disadvantage as well. I applaud those who are determined enough to sift through their two languages on a daily basis. This is not just a work, school, or home. This is also during every day tasks and interactions. The values of each language may encourage the individual to use one for a certain situation even though it is not the "proper" language for wherever they are.

I do not have to struggle with competing languages, but I certainly have unending respect for those who do. I have a hard enough time with just English as my language. What experiences have you had with competing voices? How do you think one who is in this situation gets through these difficulties?

I'm Going to Change the World

"Those who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world are the ones that do" 

- Steve Jobs

I am 100% crazy in the fact that I have every intention of changing the world. I have a heart for helping others and making a positive impact on their lives. I love people, being around people, and meeting new people. So taking this and using my strengths to, as my parents like to say, "save the world" won't be that hard, right? 

Well here's my plan. It starts with graduating with a degree in International Studies, which has a focus on Latin American politics and diplomacy. From here I'll use my degree to find a position in the non-profit, humanitarian aide, international development agency communities; this provides a pretty impressive spread of different opportunities. One thing I know for sure is that I do not want to let myself end up behind a desk for the rest of my life. I am aware that I will certainly have points in my career where this will be inevitable, but I won't last long enclosed in an office. 

The best way to phrase what I want to do is that I want to be the "hands" of one of the groups. I want to be on the team responsible for bringing the changes that are development in the office and making the dreams of the people I work with come to life. One day I hope to have my own non-profit that benefits a place on the earth that takes part of my heart. I have an overwhelming passion for changing the world and I dream of being the individual that comes into a community at its weakest, works with the people to make improvements, and only leaves once it is thriving.  

Lately, I've had to reassure myself that as crazy as my dreams seem now, they will pan out to be the aspirations I have been setting for myself throughout my life. I like to think that if your dreams don't scare you then they aren't big enough, this may be asking to make some outlandish goals for myself but I can't let myself sacrifice my passions to make my journey easier. 

"Bunny Man Bridge"

Yes, you read that right. Bunny Man Bridge. This was an urban legend that circulated around my suburban neighborhood when I was growing up in Northern Virginia. I was one of the older children of the families that made up our community so it was my job to help pass along this legend to the younger kids. We obviously did this to scare them as well.

This legend has been carried on since the beginning of the 1900s and has even brought Clifton, Virginia into the national spotlight. Here is how the story goes:

After the Civil War, an insane asylum was built in the Clifton area. The residents didn't like this and petitioned to get it relocated. While relocating the residents the bus got into an accident and some of the residents escaped. Two men were never found. While on the search police would find random mutilated bunnies. They then found one of the escapees hanging from the bridge and dubbed the lone escapee, Bunny Man. 

Things slowed down for awhile until the townspeople started seeing dead bunnies again. Then one Halloween night some teenagers went to the bridge and do what teenagers back then did. At midnight they were all murdered and left hanging from the bridge. This was said to have happened within a blink of the eye by the soul of the Bunny Man. 

The myth is that every Halloween when young people go to the bridge they will be murdered by the Bunny Man come midnight if they are directly under it. If they choose to stay in the vicinity of the bridge, not under it, they will survive. 

It is now a popular and terrifying game to go to the bridge on Halloween and see who has the guts to go under the bridge and wait; I can't say that I've ever done this. 

This is the link to a rendition of the "full" story:

http://www.castleofspirits.com/clifton.html

This is just another example of an urban legend and how long the history can be. Since the early 1900s this myth has been circulating communities. Upon learning about this as a pre-teen, I had the desired reaction. Every bridge I saw brought chills down my spine and I no longer had the desire to venture outside after dark. I have to admit I have never been too keen on going outside after dark, anyway. This story just added to my hesitance, though. 

What do you think the moral of this story is? What strategies were used to engage the audience? Is this legend similar to those that you've heard throughout your life? 

The Drone Debate

There's a new debate in the world of warfare. This time it is about silent warfare. The drones that have been created for "targeted killing" and will open the door to a completely new side of warfare. These machines are programmed to target a certain person that has been deemed an enemy of the state. They are given this title because of secret evidence that the CIA and government compile, this is how the ACLU, or American Civil Liberties Union, describes these machines.

The ACLU blog offers factual evidence in the form of lawsuits regarding this debate. The blogger uses the logos appeal to pull in the reader with these court case synopsis's. The list of potential "enemies of the state" are referred to as "kill lists" on the blog. When describing how one is added to this list, the author focuses on the secretive aspect of the process. The diction used draws the reader's attention to this and then causes them to doubt the decisions made by the government.
Using the court cases is also an example of using the pathos appeal. Upon learning that one of those killed by a drone was a 16 year old American citizen the readers are certainly going to question their stance on this debate; this is certainly what the blogger is hoping for. The tone of the blog is one that is trying to convince its readers of the faults in this new military strategy.

A similar blog is that from the Huffington Post. The header "Murder Machines" runs across the page in large, bold, red print. This is the bloggers first attempt to get the readers' attention. The tone is already given with these two words. It is obvious that the blogger intends to inform the readers of the negative impacts of these drones. The blogger addresses the killings done by American soldiers that is very rarely looked into. By using statistics, such as the amount of weaponry the U.S. owns, and how much we have spent on it, the blog gains credibility and the information adds to the debate of the drone decision.
The blog then uses a story of a U.S. Staff Sergeant killed in action. When reading about a fellow American being killed in war one would feel the need to retaliate, correct? Army officials argue that if a drone was overhead there would have been a spared life. So the blog then uses the appeal of pathos, but in a more conflicting manner. Do we use drones to protect lives? Are they really "murder machines"?

This is an extremely heated debate that is intertwined with politics, military strategy, and American welfare and safety. My reason for looking into such a controversial topic was because I was expecting to find blogs that used many strategies to convey their message, and that is what I found. I also learned quite a bit of information that I did not know before.

So would these strategies have worked on you if you were reading these blogs? If a blog is so deep in politics does it even need several strategies? Or does the amount of emotions involved in these debates suffice?

So What is Today's Culture?

This question has become HUGE in today's academic discussions, articles, debates, you name it. With Facebook, Twitter, and youtube, the ways of communication and news acquisition has changed dramatically. Now, I'm not saying that our culture or generation is in a downward spiral and will never slow down, but our culture has certainly changed. We are a society wrapped around convenience, and this means the popularity of online sources increase.

I'll be the first to admit, I usually see news stories on Twitter or Facebook first. I check those websites more frequently than an actual news source. This may not be the most ideal way to get important information, but that's just how it is today. Once I see something of importance I obviously do my research before truly believing what I read, but more often than not, these social networking sites are the first to "report" events.

One thing I have yet to do is turn to the internet for a source of dating. I do have the opportunity to see what my friends experience though. There are dating apps for smartphones. Yes, apps just for finding your "perfect match". In my opinion, dating is one thing that shouldn't be turned into an app. We are pushing the limits of what should be left to the internet, and what shouldn't be. There are youth that now believe their only way to find someone for them is through social networking sites, or dating apps. I really don't think that a middle schooler should have that mind set quite yet.

The ages of kids with iPhones, Facebooks, and Twitters seems to decrease annually. I was at my younger sister's basketball game and there were 4th graders running around with iPhones. I know this debate has been argued to death, but why can't 4th graders go outside and play for entertainment? I think that is definitely more fun than playing Fruit Ninja on my couch, or Instagramming pictures of my cat. I'm not saying that either of these activities aren't fun, I'm guilty of doing both, but you aren't a kid forever and I think it is sad to see that instead of riding bikes and playing kickball, kids are settling for their electronics for entertainment.

What I'm trying to say is that the dependence on digital media is much more of an influence than we'd like to believe. No one wants to admit that their children are already addicted to their smartphones and game consoles. But it is the cold, hard truth, unfortunately. This is resulting in children maturing faster and partaking in activities that kids of their age should not be doing. It will keep happening until the dependence on these devices decreases. This will likely not happen due to the high usage and popularity of these types of media and entertainment, but it is always worth a try.

So what is a good age for children to start joining the digital community? When did we start shifting to this society with such a dependence on media? These are all questions that are commonly asked but the actual answers may never be concrete.

Culture is Everything

Culture. It's what brings a society together. It's every aspect of our lives. It is the defining aspect of the different societies in our world.

Many people may think of being "cultured" as attending plays, reading distinguished literature, or visiting museums with timeless art pieces. From an anthropological stand point culture is none of these. It is the characteristics of a group of people that make them a society. Take the Aboriginal people for example, the way they dress, what they eat, their means of transportation, their entertainment is all aspects of their culture. Culture is created by the people of a society. It's a self constructed concept that is now used to identify different groups. 

This concept is what has created many of the world's conflicts. When one culture clashes with another, war breaks out. Southern Sudan became a country because of culture clash. One can easily forget how big of a role culture plays in our lives.

I would align my opinion of this term with Aime Cesaire's:

" Culture is everything. Culture is the way we dress,

 the way we carry our heads, the way we walk,

the way we tie our ties -- it is not only the fact of

writing books or building homes." 



Like I have said before, every aspect of our lives can be used to define the culture we live in. The commonalities of a group of people is what makes up their culture. I'm from New England. There is a completely different culture in Southeastern Connecticut than in Texas. Culture does not have to be an international concept, it is close to home and can be used to describe our most mundane and what we believe to be routine activities and behavior.

This is my anthropology based definition of culture. How does it compare to yours? What does culture mean to you?