Monday, September 22, 2008

Orality vs Literacy

Communication is life. With it, the world can function with ease, and make advancements or corrections as needed. Without it, we would not be here right now. In ancient times, there were primitive versions of language and writing such as notched bones and tokens (image on page 19 of the text Communication in History) that were used for quantitative data. Then things advanced with the invention of the alphabet, and writing and spoken word were more like they are today. The question is, which is better? The answer is subjective, but in my mind orality and speech win this argument hands down. Needless to say, this argument can’t be proved until both sides of the spectrum have been thoroughly analyzed.

Although writing is the precursor orality, speech is the most important technology in the realm of communication, and it does have quite a history. For example, jump way back in time to 1500 BCE at the invention of the Phoenician alphabet. This alphabet contained phonograms, which were parts of the alphabet that corresponded to making a certain sound which was usually the main syllable of a word (page 44 in the text Communication in History). Later in 700 BCE the Greek alphabet emerged, which was far more advanced and primarily based on speech. It was more advanced because of the invention of vowels, which made speaking far less complex and also made writing and speech parallel. From this, schooling, psychology, and memory were introduced. Eric Havelock, a British classicist professor discussed these three things under the title of “The Greek Legacy”, and proved that the Greek alphabet is responsible for them.

Moving on to more modern times, it is quite evident that effects of speech on society are far more prominent than the effects of writing on society. Seeing a person speak with power and emotion is far more effective than reading the same thing that was spoken. The proper term for this is secondary orality, which is basically a process that makes originally spoken things into print. This is ineffective in attempting to prove something to the consumer or reader, because there is no visible emotion in writing. A perfect example of this is Martin Luther King Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech. In his speech, one can see how emotional he is on the subject. The tone and speaking patterns in his voice grab the listener’s attention. The hand gestures and facial expressions further more advance his point. Another perfect example of this is any speech from Adolph Hitler, during his rule in Germany. If one watches THIS VIDEO with English subtitles, it proves my point further more. If you listen to the video with out reading subtitles, you can clearly see how much emotion and anger is in his voice. You can pretty much tell the type of person he is just by hearing his voice, even though it is in a different language. If the video is muted and only the subtitles are read, it looks like a boring speech that has some, but not a lot of emotion.

Writing is a useful and important form of communication, and it was the precursor or speech, but I still strongly believe that orality is the most dominant and important factor of communication. In our world today, people are remembered for what they said and how they said it. Martin Luther King Jr and Adolph Hitler would never have been as effective as they were if everything they said was just written down and then handed to the public. If the phonogram was never invented, then we wouldn’t even have speech today. If you think about it, what would your life be with out speech? Everyone would be walking around with a pad and paper (assuming that was even invented) writing things down and showing it to people that they needed to speak with. Everything would be a much slower process, and mass communication would be nearly impossible. If mass communication didn’t exist, then nobody would know anything that went on outside of their limited area. There would be no communication between countries, and far more feuds and disagreements because of it. For this assignment, I attempted to go just 12 hours without talking to anyone, and I couldn’t go for a half an hour. That I think proves my point the most. Day to day life relies on speech, so with out it we would be in an extremely difficult lifestyle.

Monday, September 15, 2008

Drilling in ANWR, and rebates revieved by Alaskans.

One aspect of the current race for president that I feel very strongly about deals with drilling for oil, whether it be on the continental shelf, or in the ANWR in Alaska. To me, there is no reason not to do this, but there are multiple sides to each argument.
Environmentalists use the acronym "ANWR" to define the 19.5 million acre refuge will be developed for energy. Actually, the area at issue covers only 1.5 million acres and it is termed the "10-02 Area" refering to a section legislation expanding ANWR -- the Alaskan National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which designated land for "oil and gas exploration." Only 2,000 acres of the 10-02 Area are to be used for the permanent "infrastructure", that meaning the pipelines, oil wells, etc. The10-02 area is neither a refuge or wilderness, and definitely not that "pretty" despite constant claims by the environmentalists.
The United States Geological Survey has estimated ANWR holds a mean estimate of 10.4 billion barrels of recoverable oil. I heard the statistic on the radio show I worked for this summer that that would be enough oil to supply us for at least 50-75 years.
I'm not saying that we need to completely rely on oil, because obviously it is a limited supply that absolutely can't be relied on. I'm saying that it doesn't do anybody any good just sitting there not being used. Assuming that my statistic is correct, it would give us that much more time to come up with other alternatives to be distributed to the public. I'm also not a fan of huge gas prices.
Finally getting to my article that I found on the Drudge Report several days ago, it shows that we can atleast get some temporary relief from prices, get some money back, and buy more time for more alternatives, and get people to get these alternatives. There are some people that don't have easy access to gas and the such, and there is a good quote in this article about that.

"Sam Shields, who lives in the Kuskokwim River town of Bethel, said the state money is desperately needed in his community, where he recently saw a whole chicken selling for $23 at the local grocery store."

and


"When it gets real cold in winter, it can take five gallons of fuel for heating overnight," said Wanda Sue Page, who lives in the Arctic village of Noatak, where residents pay more than $9 a gallon for gasoline and nearly $10 a gallon for heating oil."

To sum up my argument, I'll finish with the final line of the article, which shows that the money that these people are getting is going to go right back to where it came from.

"Everyone around here was happy to hear how much we're getting," he said. "Mainly everybody here is saying they're going to use it on fuel."

Bibliography
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D930QBHGA&show_article=1 -main article
http://www.aim.org/guest-column/drill-anwr-realism-over-emotion/ -stats and numbers on ANWR


Monday, September 8, 2008

Blog # 1

Blog # 1

Hey all,

My name is Luke Solomon, and I’m a Media Communication Studies major with a minor in English. I would like to have a career in broadcast, particularly radio. This past summer I interned at CBS News radio in DC where I did production work for two nationally broadcasted shows, each show going out to over 400 radio stations. Currently, I am an intern at 98Rock – a Baltimore rock station working in the promotions department, going out to events promoting the station. I am also a Host on WMBC’s “Guerrilla Radio”- the campus radio station, where I have a weekly show that includes talk, music, and sports discussions. I am also the bassist for the band Mother Nature’s Recipe, you may have seen us play at the Commons, the talent show, Eco fest, and Quadmania.

Being a MCS major, and wanting to have a career in radio, media is and will be a large part of my life. My view of the media is that the majority is bias, but sometimes it is ok because people like to have views that they can relate to, or they just can’t stand the opposing views position. I like being able to relate with my own group majority of the time, but it is impossible to understand everything without looking at both sides of the spectrum.

The Blog I have chosen to follow is the Drudge Report. This summer at my internship, I went to this site a lot to find current events and news for both shows I worked for.