'Glocal Scene'-becoming mainstream without mainstream industries

'Glocal Scene' was about how 'local' musicians could still be known through posting their music in the internet and performing theirmusic anywhere they can. Local bands are not trying to get industries to acknowledge, produce, and promote their music, but are trying to make the sound they want to make and 'share' it with other people. This is definitely different from how the music industry works. Most music industries know that there is a tune that sells, whetherthe sound is creative or not. They produce music for the artist, or at least choose which songs to sell and promote. And as the documentary 'Money for Nothing : Behind the Business of Pop Music' shows, venues and resources to produce and perform music are owned by few promoters-making it hard to distribute music unless they work within the system of the music industry.This makes it hard for musicians who are not making music that can 'sell' be known to a wider range of people.
Glocal Scene shows that nowadays, through the internet music can be distrubuted and circulated throughout the world. Musicians can make the music they want to make, distribute it with low cost, and reach to a wider audience. Since they can work more independantly, various types of music can be made, and musicians could experiment using theircreativity. The documentary is mainly showing this point, but has a limit in that it is only showing English using bands, and in that it has a too positive view of the internet.


The internet has become an alternative place in delievering and promoting music. However, even the internet works under acapitalistic system(or rather it is subject to the evolutionary theory). What is not 'popular', dies out. Of course just being able to post the music on the internet is a great advantage and opens an opportunity to be heard. Many styles of music can be posted on line, but depending on the 'preference' of the audience, some songs or performances will get more clicks or visits while others just fade away in the background, and be forgotten. That is, the internet could be a place where evaluation of what kind of sound is popular and the creation of anothermainstream happens just quicker and faster-something the music industry is doing already.Of course just being able to post the music on the internet is a great advantage and opens an opportunity to be heard.
One French musician in the Glocal Scene said she had to use English on the lyrics of her music, because that was the only way people would even try to listen to it. People wouldn't listen to a 'French' French rock band. This shows howthat even the internet has its mainstreams formed and how it could form mainstream, excluding the various musicians, theirlanguage, style, and artistic forms that are unique of their home.

Depiction of Crime in News-Avoiding the 'Real Problem'?

In today's class there was a discussion about the reading 'Prime Suspects: The influence of Local Television News on the Viewing Public'. There were questions about if the news should censor the amount of crime we see on TV, and if crime on the news will have a negative effect on people. I think the problem is not just about the amount of the crime the media shows but definitely the way news shows crime. The news concentrates on an individual-the individual's race, actions, what weapon one used, etc. They show surveillance camera coverages, and interviews from witnesses. They need the audience'sattention, so they show fragmented, sensational, clear images of what the person(or people)did, over and over again, emphasizing the violent part of the crime. The news focuses on just the people who commited the crime.

However, crime is not necessarily about the 'bad' individual(s), but a more complicated problem interwined with social background, inequality, class, national welfare, law, politics, government policy, and so on. Problems such as national welfare and social inequality could be the basic reason of crime. For example, if a society does not provide enough resources for an unwed mother, the mother would have to find more work to provide for herself and her child. Also as a woman she could be less paid than a man, which makes her busy in earning the money she needs for life. So the mother is too busy to spend more time with her child, which can make the child fall into various trouble(gangs, drugs, and what not)without the parent being able to warn about or prevent beforehand. This, in the end, could lead to crime. Of course the example is too simple and it's all under assumption ofwhat 'might' happen, but it is possible. So crime cannot just be seen as an individual problem.

The news does not go into depth from this point of view, or address the problems of the system relating to crime. They might sometimes address the problems of the judicial system. However, those are the consequences of crime, rather than fundemental aspects of why something is happening, and how it can be prevented. This kind of media coverage has a negative effect, not that it would cause future generations to be violent, but to feel 'fear'-afraid of 'people', rather than making people try to think about how the system should be fixed. What is more problematic is that based on the news depictions of crime, the fear and prejudice could be toward certain class/race/gender. People would lose judgement about what is happening in the society they live, when they should be able to see that there is more to a crime than violence and a 'prime suspect(s)'. These days the media, which should be addressing the social issues behind the incidents, seem to be just avoiding controversy or complicated reporting in order to make the news more 'attractive'.

The Internet as a 'Public Sphere'

Habermas wrote about the 'public sphere' as a system where individuals could express their opinions and share them with other individuals. The media, such as newspapers could be a kind of 'public sphere', as they have a role in addressing questions about social issues and also criticizing the political power. A few classmates talked about how the internet fuctions as a public sphere. Clearly(as Habermas explains) media such as newpapers and TV news have become a place for competition of private interests, in which many cases the interest of the powerful win. The media has become less critical, more sensational, and less concerning of the 'public interest'.And media has been mostly a one-way process, the few creators injecting information to the audience. The audience did not have an accessible, convenient outlet to show their opinions, until the advent of the Internet.

I do think the features of the Internet-blogs, commenting, and accessibility-help people from all over the world share ideas and contest againstthe dominating ideas from the (previous) mainstream media. However, the internet can be used by the powerful to manipulate people and spread ideologies, and spread information that are in favor of certain parties. And since the circualtion of info is so quick and contributors in some way anonymous it can be done with less effort.A very basic example is the commenting or rating about movies on the internet. This seems to be collecting public opinion, but 'anyone' couldcomment or vote-meaning people who need the movie to be seen as a good one could add fake comments. People could be paid to do this, or corporatemembers can disguise themselves as consumers and put in a good word for a specific product. It's the same for politicians and social issues. Rumors can be spread to make the 'opposite' side to look bad, with no confirmation about whether the information is true or not.

Also the anonymity of the internet causes people to be more careless when they express their opinions. There is an on going debateabout the abolition of anonymity in the Internet. Some people think the government is just trying to get hold of people who are critical about thepolicies of the government, and freedom of speech would be impossible once anonymity is not ensured.

The problem of consummerism in the internet is also an issue. Bloggers post what they think about some product or some place. First it's justlike a diary, the postings casual. Later on businesses in all areas find bloggers who have the ability to write a good posting, and use them as amarketing point. Some publishing companies also publish a book based on the postings of a blog-travel guides, cookbooks, DIY book, and so on(Since the cost is relatively lowand the content popular because it 'seems' candid). The internet is a source where people could express opinions right away, and read what others think. However there are many problems such as those above-which makes the Internet to have limits as a public sphere. The contents could be just as fabricated and turned into a tool to make profit, or earn publicity.

Media and Ideology-Few examples I have encountered

Media is a source of reproducing social norms. How the media depicts a certain content, or how it excludes/includes contents are ways that the media makes the social norms more concrete. There are also media contents that challenge the dominant ideology, however it is limited in exposure.

Personally I think the school textbook is an influential media. The textbook, whatever subject it may be, are reproductions of perceptions and concepts the society accepts as normal. Recently there was an issue about a new highschool economy textbook in Korea. Generally Korean society perceives competition, especially for financial success negatively. Also people are not in favor of the big corporations as they are(in most cases)the center of corruption. So Korean school textbooks on the Economy subject usually have negatvie notions about spending and earning money. Dissatisfied with the 'narrow' views of the textbook, corp owners have made an association called 'The New-Right Oraganization', and have made new Economy textbooks that have positive views about competition, the market, and consumming. People are worried about that the new textbook will influence students to become more comfortable about consummerism and make financial success their main purpose of life. On the otherhand, the New-Right Organization believes that consumming cannot just be negatively seen, as it is necessary for the growth of the economy.

Media can also be a way dominant ideas can be challenged, thought limitidly. I remember seeing an ad for gay rights. A teenage boy was having dinner with his two fathers. He looks around nervously, and brings up the courage to say "I'm not gay". This ad is challenging the conception that gay parents would be a 'bad influence 'to the child if they are allowed to adopt, because they are not a 'normal' family. However I saw this ad through the internet, and I am not sure how long or often, and specifically what kinds of channels this ad was shown.