Welcome to Episode 5 of Baha’i Blog’s video series called WHAT’S THAT WORD?, where our host Jordan Raj helps explain the meaning of certain words we may come across in the Baha’i Writings in a light-hearted and comedic way.
All the examples quoted are referenced from the Baha’i Library and can be found online by searching the phrases.
WHAT’S THAT WORD? is Presented by Jordan Raj (@MrJordanRaj)
Be sure to “Subscribe” to Baha’i Blog’s YouTube Channel for more great videos like this one!
Watch WHAT’S THAT WORD? Episode 1 here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw3qpB4OV_g
Watch WHAT’S THAT WORD? Episode 2 here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXAbxY1JaFw
Watch WHAT’S THAT WORD? Episode 3 here:
Watch WHAT’S THAT WORD? Episode 4 here:
This weeks reading was focused around a very interesting topic; namely the representation of women in music videos. Both readings were excerpts from “Music Video and the Politics of Representation (2007) by Diane Railton and Paul Watson”. The first section was a study on Pinks “Stupid Girl” music video. The video aims to challenge many of the ‘Paris Hilton’ stereotypes of womens beauty and image. However, the discussion was if it was fair to both sexes or simply urged women to be more masculine. Personally, I have strong beliefs in the equality of men and women, thus this video was intriguing for me. Although it did challenge the image of women, it did little to provide an image for what a strong woman could be. In a way it was a critique without presenting a solution and therefore should not be taken too literally as a feminism text, and more of a satirical remark.
The second reading was where most of my interest was sparked, the treatment of Black vs White women in music video. It compared the representation of Kylie Minogue in ‘Cant Get You Out of My Head’ versus Beyonce in ‘Baby Boy’ – and the results were shocking! I had not realized up until this point that black women are represented in a much more degrading way than white women. The reading suggested that they are portrayed as more ‘animalistic’ and ‘available’, where as white women are ‘untouchable’ and ‘idolized’. After this was brought to my attention I started to notice how often it happens, for example with Niki Minaj’s ‘Anaconda’.
It simply has given me headspace to be more conscious of how i portray women when i make my own music videos, and be more critical about the music videos i watch.
Yes, I know the title of this post makes me sound like a programmer, but no, Im not a programmer.
Today I met up with Dusty as part of the tech team to work on the final video export which will be handed over to Signal. This wa s a process that took much longer than expected. Thinking it would take 30mins to half an hour, we ended up spending about 3 hours working on the edit. We had to gather peoples footage from google drive and a hard drive, put it into a centralized location and then cut it into segments. After tediously splitting the clips into part 1,2,3 and 4; Dusty made me name them so that we would not forget whos they were and where they went. I complained bitterly about this but ended up thanking her later when it got confusing. Then we placed all the clips together paying close attention to the common themes, colours and visual styles. Ensuring that everybody’s work was spaced evenly throughout the presentation and that there was nothing missing. Finally we had a very near complete composition bar only a few straggling clips. The total thing came down to about 12 minutes when edited together.
Later on we added blank clips in between everything so that there was a pause. These were later removed once Robbie was consulted.
At the end of Daniel Binns lecture he posed the following prompts for us to write on.
Technological determinism is a valid way of looking at the world I will have to admit at this point that i did in fact miss the begning of the lectorial so i donot know what Technological Determinism is
Humanity is in Charge of it own future
This prompt brings to mind the current argument about artificial intelligence. it seems that the great minds of our day and age such an Elon Musk and Steven Hawkings believe it is detrimental to our future. However, i personally dont see how it is posible for a machine to take over when it has been programmed by humans. I believe that if it is possible that they will indeed become intelligent i believe that computers need moral education. Yes ok, sounds crazy. But think about it, if the machines grow up with a moral compass they will have no interest in overthrowing their parents, much like children. The issue here is the teen years when they think that they know better.
Just a few thoughts.
If this was a fishing trip, then this curation post would be the final throw of the net.
The following five posts have been hand-picked by me to outline some of the key learning moments from the course, I have also added an annotation to explain why I made each particular choice.
1. “Goals and Keeping Score” – This was from the first Lectorial of the course, it outlined the goals for the end of the course as well as reflected on the reading and applying it to my own life
2. “Noticing Your Dreams” – My favourite reading from the whole of Semester one is the Mason reading on Noticing, i found that this was applicable in my life and it was something which i often thought about.
3. “Detachment from Creation” – Reflection on the lectorial Paul Ritchard gave on serendipity. Caused me to ponder my own creative process
4. “Audio Recorda” – Thoughts about the nature of life, and equipment we use to capture it. Results of the Workshop on Audio Recording
5. “Ageing Media Data” – Response to the Lectorial where Brian Morris spoke about media consumption and the ways in which it is now accessed.
Looking at the posts i have selected, i realised that my best posts have been those that resonated with me, or spoke to a personal concern. I am quite thankful that this is the case as i often find it difficult to engage when there is no vested interest.
Finally, the learning graph for the semester has been attached below.
During the lectorial today Brian played a video about how much media Australians consume. Statistics ranging from the amount of TV people watched, all the way to the number of Tablets owned by the population. However, I found the statistics to be somewhat unbelievable. Meaning that I as a 20 year old Male living in Australia did not believe that people still preferred watching TV over browsing the internet.
So if we assume that the cenus was correct, why is it that I disagree with the statistics? This draws forward two potential thoughts for consideration; firstly, because i am only aware of the media consumption of similar demographic, and secondly, the weighting of the survey is equal and not objective.
The idea that i am only aware of media consumption within my demographic is fairly self explanatory; i prefer browsing the web to watching TV, my friends also do therefore, i would conclude that everyone does. Weighting of the survey however is a separate issue, for those of us who are mathematically inclined we will know about the normal distribution or bell curve, it is possible for this bell curve to be skewed if there is a bias of data on one side. I believe this happened with the survey. The data presented by Brian Morris might be mathematically accurate, however i dont believe this is a true representation. For this representation to be accurate we need to look more objectively and weigh up more strongly the media choices of those in the key consumer demographics. We know that currently in Australia we have an ageing population, assuming that older people are not computer literate it is most likely that television is their media choice. Once this data gets added to the census we suddenly think that the majority of the population prefers tv, when really the trend it quite heavily moving to internet TV.
Im not saying that we should disregard the media choices of the elderly, im just saying that the weighting of surveys needs to be looked at more objectively especially to the most active consumers of media.
Finally, the envelope for Project Brief 4 has been and sealed, in other words, we have reached the end. There has been a lot of learning that has taken place over the course of the project, especially considering that it was a group effort, which means there’s always more than one perspective to take into account.
Luckily our group was very dynamic, everybody brought a specific skill forward which was vital in creating the final project. From the earliest meeting we all established that video production was our collective strength. Due to this we ended up creating a video product which was new and adventurous. Before I further elaborate on this; the collaborative contract needs to be mentioned. Throughout our first and second meetings we constructed a contract which outlined the role and responsibilities of all the group members, additionally there was a plan for conflict resolution. We were fortunate enough, as mentioned previously, to not need conflict resolution at any point. However the roles and responsibilities got us to think about how we would go about creating the video. This was very helpful in assisting the process of arranging the production timeline, we simply split up the work and consulted on when it was to be delivered, at the convenience of the person responsible.
This initial planning as well as the synergy between cooperative group members allowed us to easily create our meetup times for our soon to be ‘choose your own adventure’ video. The early meetings also gave us time to come to the same vision as to what the final product would look like, we all understood the basic concepts of using Youtube annotations and what was practically possible; yet another strength of all having a video production background among group members. This made the conceptualization and writing process a fluid process.
Due to the divided workload and the constructive collaboration the whole project was easily filmed within three main meetings. Once this was done the post production process began, we used Facebook as our communication platform, constantly sharing footage, suggestions and ideas, this meant that the final project was truly one born from group collaboration.
However, this post production stage is also where i believe there could have been improvements. Although we did decide on who would be doing the editing I believe the post production work load was not evenly distributed. It is arguable that certain group members did have more time to contribute to the project, so this was the way the work naturally distributed. The way it ended up being structured was that one group member mainly worked on the editing. The others provided feedback and helped with the paperwork and filming process. Although this might be unevenly weighted it sadly does make sense. Editing is a very personal process, often when too many people edit the same project there is a loss in consistency of style. Thus, in a way it was for the benefit of the final project that one person did the editing. It allowed for there to be a consistent tempo and visual feel to the work.
The final product created I believe did achieve the initial goal of the project. It provoked thoughts about the ways we use and notice media in our daily lives. Given more time the project could go into further detail and have more choices and commentaries, however, as a starting point it achieved its goal.
Overall, this project has been a very constructive group assignment. With contrast to other group work it was painless and efficient. I believe that the final product created will be well received and has created a platform for future development.