Dogwonder

Hypodermic needle models

est. March 2, 2007

Just seen this question and answer (taken from a textbook called Being Sociological).

Approaches to media that see the audience as a passive mass of spectators are known as:
Hypodermic needle models

I find it quite interesting as there appears to be an ever increasing shift away from this model. I have been noticing more and more that a less passive model is appearing in the daily discourse. Broadcasters are realising more and more that their audience aren’t a bunch of knuckle dragging imbeciles that should be kept at arms length lest they contanimate the cultural froth (or that they still think exactly that but you can’t stop people in the days of t’internet, multi channel TV, etc.). But whatever the reasons I welcome the change, I am fed up with being spoken to by The Media as if I am an idiot that has to be subjected to a constant barrage of bright colours, metaphorical smoke and mirrors imagery operating on a clever ‘subconscious’ level (read sex and a better lifestyle). I welcome a more two way conversation maybe then we can say, you know what, that advert – it demeans me and lots of others, stop it.
— Sent from my comfortable office chair —

Pink n Blue

est. March 1, 2007

Pink n blue

50’s paint colours

est. February 9, 2007

50s paint colours

#e2eddd, #bd7f72, #cad0ac, #d8634f, #fae49b, #ae846c, #f2c3a9, #868c7e, #fce750, #cdbcb2, #f8dbbb, #858667, #adb59d, #d8cec2, #fcd0c5, #dfe0c1, #f0f6ec

Whisper it, the ‘T’ word

est. February 7, 2007

Reading the news about the letter bombs sent to various motoring agencies this morning, I noticed a lack of the T word, terrorism in many of the reports. Sounds like a cast iron case (in my opinion) for the use of such a word.

Now I don’t want to make unfounded suggestions but if letter-bombs were sent, say from an Islamic source, to say a governmental department (of which capita and the dvla are not far from being) the newspapers would be swimming with headlines such as terror threat, campaign of terror etc etc. Now I am not trying to make any sort of judgement, simply pointing out the perceptual difference that would occur if the targets were slightly different. People are still being injured, maybe the bombs are not intended to harm, but then again even the act of attempting to send such devises constitutes terrorism so that doesn’t really count.

But I guess seeing as it’s seemingly a (white urban male) nutter with a grudge against driving laws then I guess it doesn’t qualify. Which begs the question, what exactly is terrorism? But even weirder is the complete lack of any suggestion this is terrorism, so what is it about the story that made this simply a crime and not an act of terrorism? The perpetrator (whom we know nothing about), the targets (as mentioned effectively governmental departments) or the size of the explosives?