Paris Hilton's My New BFF

The Birth of Reality TV

the best bubble tea

Where Amazing Happens

We produced two videos in the style of the NBA's "Where Amazing Happens" promos:

Training Day 09

Bill O'Reilly: a viral day late and a viral dollar short

Bill O'Reilly is upset about last year's David After the Dentist viral video.

Via Videogum.

Toothpaste for Dinner: "Treadmill Shopping"

I thought this was appropriate given the subject of our class.

toothpastefordinner.com

Not a propaganda

I think this is not a propaganda because it is a kind of entertainment video rather than one created to persuade someone. People made it because it's interesting to see if we were really speaking out our thoughts everything in our daily life.

The reason for it goes viral is mainly because it is interesting and funny.

Propaganda

I believe this video definitely is propaganda. It uses a lot of indirect, sarcastic mechanisms to achieve its message, 

but I think that it is similar to the video we watched that the British made to make fun of the Nazis in WWII because 

it uses a funny/sarcastic point of view. The video keeps talking about what would happen "If God disappeared...", 

however, the point that the video tries to make is that all these things are either ridiculous and wouldn't actually 

happen (like feeling empty inside) or that they've already happened even with god (random natural disasters would 

occur). I believe it is propaganda mostly because it offers no voice to the other side of the argument. It achieves its

purpose in my opinion, because it makes some of the claims of religious people look illogical.

I believe it went viral because it can be used by both sides. Religious people can send this video to friends who are

religious and say "Look how intolerant they are of our beliefs. They make us look dumb" while atheists can sent it

to each other and say "Look how illogical religion is." Either way, the video creates controversy and makes both sides

want to give their take on it.

Propaganda: Planned Parenthood Action Fund

This is a pro-Obama, anti-McCain propaganda video. It uses testimonials by quoting newspapers out of context, for example the "dishonest" and "deceptive" quotes which are simply words pulled out of longer quotes. They are using name-calling by saying McCain doesn't care about the safety of our kids and showing a older male watching children outside insinuates that it could be McCain. They say that McCain will "Say Anything to Get Elected" which discredits him as well. Planned Parenthood also only supplies information supporting Obama. They never give reasons why McCain doesn't agree with the "legislation to teach children to protect themselves". The cause they are fighting for is also vague so it is difficult for viewers to know what Obama is actually supporting and McCain is opposing. 

This video probably went viral because it was a campaign video featuring the two candidates. It also is about children's safety, which is a popular topic, and was made by Planned Parenthood which is a well-known organization.

No on 8 PSA

This video is a subtle source of propaganda that convinces the viewer to vote no on proposal 8. Although the information presented is not blatantly untruthful, it persuades us into believing the viewpoints in opposition to banning same sex marriage. The main argument for voting no is to guarantee equality and justice under the law. While this argument is portrayed in the PSA, arguments in favor of proposal 8 are neglected, such as heterosexual marriage being an essential institution in our society. This oversimplifies the topic, making voting no seem like the obvious decision.

The PSA achieves its goals by playing on our stereotypes via the actors chosen to represent ‘yes’, ‘no’, and the constitution itself. The constitution is represented by a well dressed beautiful woman and is said to be ‘perfect the way she is…no need for amending her.’ Had an unattractive actress been used, the argument for keeping the constitution unchanged would not have came across. Additionally, the guy who represents voting no on the proposal is charming, thus inclining us to believe him. He seems like an everyday dude and talks to the camera like a friend which helps us identify with him. On the other hand, an overweight guy is used to represent voting yes on the proposal. He makes a mockery of his own stance and says he likes to decide what’s appropriate for everyone else. He ends up getting rejected by the pretty girl, thus instilling in us the sense that he –and his position- loses.

In addition to leaving out information and playing on our stereotypes, the PSA uses repetition to make its point. There is a big “NO” on the attractive guys shirt, which we see throughout the video. This acts as a direct order and tells the audience what action to take.

Planned Parenthood Propoganda

This advertisement is one of the easier to identify as propoganda. It is a campaign ad, for one thing, although it is not officially endorsed by a candidate.

The spot adheres to the traditional medium of modern propoganda in being a television commercial. Nancy Snow points out in her "10 Things Everyone Should Know About Propoganda" that the concentration of mass media is essential to the production of propoganda. Youtube obviously throws this idea into complication: Several of you have pointed out videos already that were neither originated nor "propogated" by any form of traditional mass media. But I suppose this is another argument.

At issue in this commercial is Obama's support of the Planned Parenthood organization. The ad chooses to highlight their work with sexually abused children while denegrating the McCain campaign's apparent (and deliberate) misunderstanding. (A newspaper headline flashes on screen: "Obama calls for comprehensive sex education.") And then the commercial accuses the McCain campaign of dishonesty.

The complexities of the issue, in other words, are not followed through. We never learn exactly what bill Obama supported (or what his relationship to Planned Parenthood is in general.) We also get no mention of the "white elephant" in the room here, namely abortion. The commercial instead presents "different kinds of truth" as Nancy Snow has it: "half-truths, limited truths, out of context truths." As viewers, we certainly don't doubt that Obama supports activities to prevent sexual abuse, but we get the feeling there is more to the story.

It would be interesting to examine whether this commercial was more widely viewed on YouTube or on television (one has to assume the latter) but regardless, 78,000 views is fairly significant. And if the disabled comments are any indication, there might have been some fairly ugly "debate" going on. The viral appeal of the video certainly has to do with the controversial topic of abortion. Once that gets thrown into the political ring, people find they have a lot to say.

Propaganda post, assignment 3

This video is propaganda for several different reasons. First and foremost, the purpose of the video is to manipulate the audience into thinking that anything beside christian ideologies are incorrect. In fact, the man in the video goes to a Barnes and Noble and shows how a book with theories about evolution and life are somehow in the biology section. This guy is making it out like the fact that these books are in that section is total and complete blasphemy. Even though he is probably correct and is talking about an interesting subject manner it is still a form of propaganda. His tone and attitudes toward the placement of the book are propaganda in unto themselves. It is cleverly done, because it is in fact supposed to not seem like propaganda even though it is.

This video has over 110,000 views so i would say it is on the cusp of being viral, not quite. It probably became popular because it is interesting and because the user that put the video up has a good repore and several other videso. People probably like looking at his stuff, we'll see if it actually becomes viral within the next few months, if not i think it will probably die down.

Propaganda: the Creepy Guy

This video is propaganda for a number of reasons. First and foremost, the purpose of the video is to manipulate the audience into thinking that McCain doesn't care about children and is an old politician that will say anything to slander his opponent in order to succeed. Furthermore, it shows seemingly unrelated images in order to promote Obama and attack McCain. The image of the creepy adult watching children get off the bus has nothing to do with planned parenthood. In fact, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund which paid for the advertisement values pro-choice legislation, improved sex education and more affordable health care (according to their website). The image of the creepy guy is shown to be associated with McCain so people will be repulsed by him. Lastly, the part where it says "Now John McCain is twisting the facts and attacking Senator Obama" shows nothing specific or necessarily has anything to do with McCain not wanting children to protected by sex offenders.

This video has over 78,000 so I don't know how viral that is but it probably became popular because it was released just a couple of months before the election. Furthermore, the user that released it was "campaigntvads." So it was probably easily accessible at a time when people were craving such youtube videos.

propaganda assignment 3

This video attack on Michael Dukakis with the Willie Horton ad is a great example of propaganda in politics. The video hits all of the "essentials" of propaganda. The video gives people who were Bush supporters or undecided another reason to vote for Bush because of the incident with WIllie Horton and weekend passes prisoners. The video has a very strong image of Willie Horton that can place an immediate impact on anyones mind. The tone of the video and the language used is convincing to the viewer that "Dukakis on crime" is clearly not safe for America. The words used, for example calling a 17 year old a "boy" and putting kidnapping, stabbing and raping on the screened spelled out, puts an image into the viewers mind. The video also a large role in the election as it was devastating to the Dukakis campaign. Overall this is a great example of propaganda as it puts a lasting image in the viewers mind (Willie Horton's mugshot) along with the language that goes with the mugshot. The video is viral +300,000 views mostly because of the impact that the video had on the election and people who would like to see the video in the future.

Propaganda

This video is propaganda. Some would consider it good propaganda. It is an attempt to sway the demographic of people who view themselves as dignified (look and attire of dude) from alcohol use. It is also propaganda because it shows only one angle of the effects of alcohol. It omits the positive effects. It also suggests that catching a buzz will cause a person to fail at just about everything since walking is really on of the most basic of skills.

I believe this probably went viral because the makers have a large fan base and because it argues a value that many can agree with. The thumbnail also looks like it will be a funny bar video, like a rejection or something.

"For for Kids" video...

I do not think it is propaganda because it is not necessarily persuading viewers to do
anything. I see the video as device that makes light of the unfortunate situations that
continually occur in society between the law/authorities and African Americans for
whatever reason. The show "Cops" does not only affect African Americans, but a large
number of the people being arrested/chased/cuffed are African American. So for these
reasons, I'm not sure they are trying to persuade viewer of anything by making the faces
into cartoon characters. However, one vague possibility would be that they are showing
how brutal these chases can be until the point that they are funny. I think it went viral
for reasons stated in the previous sentence. The collection actions of law enforcement
and the subjects is almost too much to be true and disturbingly funny to someone who
isn't affected by any of the actions.

Propaganda

I believe this video is propaganda since it is trying to convince people that Cleveland is really not worthwhile and that they should not travel there. Even though this is their purpose, they make the video appear to be a travel video for Cleveland and travel videos usually promote a city so people will come there. However, this video is blatantly using satire in order to get its message across to people. Since it's not coming straight out and saying not to visit Cleveland, it's propaganda.

I think this video went viral because the song in it is kind of catchy and its pretty funny. Also, the fact that it is only 48 seconds long also helps to catch people's attention and keep it there.

Yes it is, Propaganda

This video is propaganda because it plays on emotion to convince voters to support Obama.

The video showcases several celebrities who can use their star-power to influence voters. For example, one might think because Nick Cannon supports Obama, they should too. This use of celebrities is also a reason why this video went viral, because it had so many working together.

This video also, as Nancy Snow puts it, "reinforce[s] exisiting opinions". This solidifies Obama supporters' thoughts that Obama provides hope and change if elected.

It also has repetition of a phrase, "yes we can". This easily repeatable phrase sticks with the viewer after watching and might even have subliminal effects.

A few last reasons why this went viral include having "Obama" in the title, and the fact that this was widely shared among social networking sites (a key that Dan Greenberg talks about).

Propaganda Homework

I've decided that this ad by the NRA against Obama -is- propaganda in the sense that it seeks to influence voters of United States from voting for Obama, and uses sensitive situations and the manipulating of information to do so:

This video appeals to fear (the fear of someone breaking into your home and harming you/your family) and also uses a average, middle-class home as the setting for the crime taking place in the video (plain folks)

The speaker is also very vague about just what it is that Obama has voted "no" (and for emphasis, stresses that Obama has voted "no" four times) against; the speaker claims that Obama voted to make "you the criminal" in the event that you use a firearm against a criminal who has broken into your house, but I doubt that the situation is that simple. Instead, the speaker leaves out this information in order to demonize Obama for the sake of persuading voters to not vote for him.

The end of the video is a display of virtue words: "Defend freedom, Defeat Obama", implying that in order to protect the virtue of freedom, Obama must be taken down.

This video went viral because it shows a different side of Obama, a side that definitely contradicts the image of him that has been portrayed throughout his campaign (him being in favor of the "common" man).