yes we can

A few weeks ago I took a critical look at representations of politics in media, including the Democratic and Republican parties as well as Barack Obama and John McCain. This week I'm turing to YouTube, and have decided to focus solely on vidoes and clips about Barack Obama, specifically how the YouTube community has interpreted and spread the message: Yes We Can.

The Democratic party, and especially this election, is known for its grassroots organization. This is especially evident on sites like YouTube, where members constantly post original or remixed videos in support of the movement. Barack Obama's 2004 convention speech ignited the message of "Yes We Can," and four years later it a core part of his capaign of hope and change. What I find most interesting is how easy it is for people to internalize and personalize this message. Yes, it is about Obama and his campaign for presidency, but his supporters have obviously taken it to mean much more.

How does YouTube represent this message? The videos I found range from the professional to the very homemade. This first video by will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas could be considered the "founder" of Yes We Can videos, and features celebrities speaking and singing to the words of one of Barack Obama's 2004 speech.



This video inspired many to create their own "Yes We Can" tributes, mixes, and original videos. What I noticed in all of them was that they are less about Obama as a person and more about the message of hope and change. The videos were about the people and their stories.

This is an a capella group that sings a version of the Yes We Can song. Much less professional than the first, it shows how the message is spreading on different levels:



Except for the very last image of Obama's circle/sun logo, this next video, titled "Yes We Can International" completely divorces itself from Obama the man and instead creates a powerful international manifest by translating his words into many world languages and giving them to real people: "Inspired by the Will I Am video, real people from all across the world take on Barack Obama's message of change and world unity."



This next video makes it personal--yes I can. Like the original will.i.am video, this one is shot in black and white, except for the Obama speech, shown in color on a small tv. Again, the message is optimism, hope, belief:



Returning to the original song idea, the next video is a grassroots response to the "hollywood" style of the will.i.am video. Here's what the YouTube video info says:

This live music video is the grassroots counterpart to the will.i.am Yes We Can video. Ariel Thiermann's original song was recorded live with Obama supporters. We challenge you to do the same and Sing for Obama! Find out how at http://singforobama.org/.

One woman wrote a song. Three women heard it and organized the Sing for Obama music video event. Four days later, over 200 Obama supporters came together to sing and the music video was recorded live. We challenge you to learn the song, make your own video and YouTube your own versions. Get creative. Make it your own. Yes We Can. Can You? Take the Sing for Obama challenge. Download the song and find out all about the challenge at http://singforobama.org/

The above video is a direct example of the power of YouTube--to comment, to create, to remix, to join, to speak. Here's another viewer's response, a simple acoustic version of the song. Here's his comment, which speaks to the "relationship" to the other video, and the immediacy of his response:

This project inspired me beyond words. I decided to figure out the guitar chords, print out the lyrics and record this version live, in one take on my laptop. I did this all within an hour or so of seeing the clip for the first time. This was a completely improvised musical performance; I did the best I could.

And finally, here's the message from Smokey:



What I learned most from this trip into YouTube was that it's sort of like a road, with many roads that lead off onto other roads. You start going in one direction, in my case with the original will.i.am video, which leads you in another direction, which leads you in another. If I'd started in another place, I would have found different videos altogether. But the videos I did find link together, they speak to each other on a common theme. They are in conversation.

I see myself using YouTube as a teacher for an exercise much like this one. I especially liked looking at the videos that "remixed" original concepts, that added personal interpretations, that dared to take the message in another direction. YouTube is an overwhelming landscape but one where much can be discovered about people's ideas and opinions. And taking another step back, I realize that this blog posting is a commentary on the message I've been examining all morning. I of course found many other videos that I chose not to highlight, and even my choices of what to post say something--this blog and the videos shown here are a critical "remix" of sorts. I know that today, at the end of a long and heavy election season, I needed to watch videos of hope. I chose, intentionally, not to analyze TV ads; I wanted optimism, not negativity; inspiration, not defeat or despair.

I am, quite clearly, a part of this message.

media ethnography - fan fiction

For this week's post I'm going to do a media ethnography study on Harry Potter fan fiction. My younger sister, who is now a freshman in college, was a big "fan" of HP fan fiction in high school, so I had the opportunity to ask her some questions about the practices of participants, as well as look at the sites, stories, and comments myself.

According to my sister, who for all the hours she spent reading fan fiction should be considered an expert, the best Harry Potter fan fiction site is the official Warner Bros site. Navigating to the message board and then the fan fiction site is sort of tricky, but here is a direct link. Incidentally, the "community" site hosts forums and message boards about everything from Harry Potter books to the movies to video games and trading cards, official "house common room" sites, as well as the fan fiction site.

There's no organization once you reach the fan site--each thread is a different story but they aren't organized according to subject, author, characters, etc., but only by most recent posting (and I believe that includes comments to the stories, which are added all the time). When I asked my sister how she chose which of the hundreds of fan fics to read, she said:

I would happen across a good one, that’s how it would start, and then I would stick with the author and follow what the author was reading and kind of go on a chain from that.

The site really is a community, and each poster establishes a profile and usually uploads a picture or graphic that appears along each of her posts. The first posting on a thread is usually the author's "rules", followed by the first installment of the story. The story I'll use as an example is one by ginnygirl18, and I chose to follow it because it had almost 4,000 replies and comments...a sure sign that it's good, according to my sister.

Hello everyone! And welcome to my brand new thread!

This is my second fic on these boards, so it's not the first time I've done this, but I'm still relatively new to the whole writing scene.

It's a Lily and James fic. It starts at the end of their seventh year, and follows them through the years after they graduate from Hogwarts. It's going to be quite different from my first fic, and I hope that you like it!

Rules (I know, booo, but there's only a couple)

1. Please, no swearing. There really is no need. And I don't want this deleted.

2. No advertising here. Unless you are a reader, and a regular bumper here, then I might just give you permission. I like to read other fics too, especially if the authors are taking the time to read mine. I like to return the favor.

3. Talk! It makes things much more interesting, and I like to get to know you a little bit. We had fun on my last thread, didn't we my lovelies?

That's it! Read away, and enjoy! I'll post after I get a couple of BUMPS!

Luv,

Amy

Lily and James fics are very popular because the authors have more freedom to expand the characters, use their imagination, and stray from J.K. Rowling's world. My sister said:

I preferred James and Lilly sotries, and it turned out that that’s mostly what people wrote about, because that’s what Rowling wrote about the least, so you can use the most imagination with them, you don’t have to be canon.

"Canon" means sticking to the facts, the real world of the Harry Potter books. Some fan fics are more canon than others, and some even invent new characters, which are called "original characters" or OC.

After ginnygirl18's post of her rules and the first installment of her story, the replies started streaming in. On these boards all replies are listed chronologically, and new installments of the story are just counted as another reply, so to read more of the story you have to tediously search through all sorts of comments and conversation. But to the true HP fan, it's worth it. Here are some examples of comments and replies on this thread:

jason_freddy:
Hi Amy!
How are you?
So new fic, eh?
Well I can't wait to start reading this!

- Jason

m.ikki.
I'M HEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRE!

It's okay, you can all relax, now. I made it. -squee-

AMY I'M SO EXCITED!


This is going to be absolutly THE. BEST.


Because I said so.


Wahoo! A post!

castine:
AMY!!!
So you're not here right now but hi!!
I loved the first post! So
BumpersZzZZzz!!
I am happy to have another thread to read :]
It was a good idea to post before you go because that first post seemed like it was setting up the actual story.
And then on sunday we get to read a much anticipated post!
However, I can't really help keep this bump'd because I shall be away too! On saturday I am going to the Youth Fair! :]
And hello to everyone else too! Its nice to know we'll all still have a place to chat.


Bumps!

Cas

titillandus88:
AMMYY!!!
Yes, the infamous orange font is BACK! muahahahaha! *ahem* right..

Well, I'm so glad you've started up again! *nods fervently* great start, this sounds so differnet from your last one, but still with all the old Amy goodness. YAY!

BUMMPPS!

(hello all you old lovlies + Jason...I'm Carly! *stick's out hand*.. we met breifly on Pippi's banner thread..
I think there's another new reader too, but i got too excited about posting and forgot who... sorry... anyway, i am looking forward to many a fun times and potatoes and such on this brand spankin' new thread! ^^

♥ Carly

I didn't copy them here, but posters often replied in conversation with each other, Amy often wrote back to each comment and new members to the thread, and an instant community seemed to form. I asked my sister about the relationships on the fan fiction sites, and she said:

On the boards for the stories people formed friendships and talked about their lives, in between posts of the story. I made a couple of friends, not like hardcore friends, but a girl names Sarah and another girl Remi.

Bumping, in case you're confused, is what what comments do to threads--they "bump" them up the "most recently posted" list, so that they're on the front page of the fan fic site. Fans can bump their favorite stories to get them best viewing space, so many comments I saw were simple one-word posts, or pictures or graphics.

--

The shared social agenda for the Harry Potter fan site seems two fold: for the authors of the post, it's to have an audience for their stories and to form a supportive and interactive community around their ideas and characters. For the readers and posters, it's to read more about their favorite fantasy world, and also interact with others who share their passion. But while the stories all had something to do with Harry Potter, even the non-canon ones that were allowed to deviate a bit, I found that the comments spent less time discussing the characters, plots, Harry Potter world in general, than the every-day lives of the commentators. It was much more about forming relationships than analyzing text. The fan sites provide a place for people to springboard off of a common interest but then develop their relationships onto many different planes.

The comments I posted earlier were from the very beginning of the thread, over a year ago, and here's a sample of what the group is talking about now, posted yesterday:

jamessiriuslover:
Hey guys!

Amykins, that last post was tre magnifique!

I loved it!

And - what the heck?! MIKKI?! Mikki was here?! For all of one minute! Omg! And I think its been two and a half years, Amykins. I think she's been gone for longer than one year. =(

So! We're talking about guys, are we? Well do I have the story for you!

This year has started and, well....I have a new crush.
And before the eyes roll and the sighs escape, let me tell you that it isnt a lovesick-puppy-dog thing. He's my really good friend, and its more of a friendship/attraction thing. I got my (first!) cell phone about a month and a half ago, and he and I have texted, like, every day since. Its a really sarcastic and joking kind of relationship, but its fun all the same. I've never knowingly flirted in my entire life, and yet my friends are telling me that I quite obviously do it all the time with him. And that he does it with me. The thing is, though, that he does that kind of thing with all his friends-that-are-girls. He's not a ****, though, at all.

And - and here's the plus - he's really good looking!

I know there is no chance of anything happening between us, because the kind of girls he normally likes, though they are all nice, are very different from me. The main difference being that they are all prettier than me. And before all you awesome VBFFs rush and say 'aww, you're pretty too, Lilly', let me assure you that I know I'm gorgeous. Lol. I'm just a different pretty than the raven haired, blue eyed beauties he usually likes.

But whatever.

We are friends more than anything. Thats what I'm always telling my friends. He is first and foremost my friend.

But congratulation Nette! I guess your out of the club, or soon will be anyway. Good for you! And happy-extremely-belated-birthday!

Bumps Amykins!

Lilly

Already there are responses to Lilly's post. She has a community, however abstract and virtual, that she knows supports her and is interested in her story, not only the romantic story of James and Lilly. I know from the hours I saw my sister spending on the computer, engrossed in the stories and with the comments, that there's something very real and important about these interactions, especially to those who participate in them.

media representation in politics

For the unit on media representations, I decided to take a closer look at the current presidential election (as, to be honest, it's often on my mind) and see how each candidate and campaign represents both itself and its audience, or in this case, voters.

Some questions I asked myself going into this were:

• what do the websites (Dem, GOP, Obama, McCain) say about the candidates, how they see themselves? how do the colors, logos, messages, words, etc. affect this representation?
• what to the websites say about the candidate's "typical voter"? who is the "typical voter" for each person?
• what do the candidate's ads and commercials say about them, and the people to whom they are trying to communicate?
• what are some of the reactions, in media, journalism, ect., to these candidates and their campaigns (knowing that by no means can I begin to cover it all...)

I got the idea for this analysis from a blog post I read about the two campaign logos--Obama's circle horizon and McCain's dash and star. I think it was a blog on Huffington Post, but I've searched and searched and can't find it, so to summarize, the author (who of course may have a bias) said that Obama's red white and blue logo has a broader appeal, as opposed to McCain's more military emblem, which he likened to the Chevrolet logo. The author also linked to this page, which shows how lots of different special interest groups like "Americans With Disabilities," "Environmentalists," and "Rural Americans" have adapted the basic Obama logo to reflect their own cultures.

I began by visiting the offical Democrat and GOP sites. Admittedly, I was confused when I went to www.gop.com and saw this:

Is Barack Obama the Republican nominee? But no...he doesn't look very trustworthy there, his name is all lowercase, and underneath I see that I can "click here to view the Joe Biden Gaffe Timeline." So this site is all about proving the negative on Barack Obama. But what if I want to learn more about my candidate, John McCain? I have to go the sidebar and do some searching and clicking. To me, this says that Republicans (the website's audience) are not looking to support their candidate, but are looking to trash their opponent, in no uncertain terms.

The Democrat site, www.democrats.org, also shows Barack Obama, but this time he's at a podium, looking proud:

This site seems to be more about the Democratic candidate, with a few headlines about McCain. The "audience" in this case would like to learn more about the candidate they support, and search and click for McCain if they so choose.

Democrats.org also takes advantage of a blue color scheme, with stars shooting out from behind the main screen, while GOP.com is a more somber dark red. Going back to some of the ideas taken from the previous logo discussion, the Dem site seems to be more hopeful and visionary, while the GOP site seems more solid. These representations speak well to each party's base.

Next I visited the websites for each party's candidate. John McCain's website follows the GOP theme of prominently featuring Barack Obama--in a negative light of course:

To be fair, the Obama "Acorn" ad is one of four screens that rotates: the others are all positive ads about McCain. This, not GOP.com, is the home of the presidential candidate. This great site shows how McCain's website has progressed over the course of his campaign. I'm glad he moved away from the all-black page--what was he going for there? Not every constituent was formerly in the military, or wants a candidate who is so bleak.

Moving to the issues, McCain's top three issues on his page are the economy, energy, and national security. This sort of belies the much-trouted idea of Republicans, that they vote according to their morals, which would have put "the sanctity of life" (read: abortion) and "the 2nd amendment" (read: gun rights) at the top. Have no doubt, these issues are there, and the position is clear. A McCain supporter believes in "winning" in Iraq, wants to privatize health care, and puts country first.

The Obama site is very very blue. It also displays four rotating ads: two of which are could be called "positive" Obama ads, and two "negative" McCain ads:

Interestingly though, and I think this is important, in the negative ads, McCain's name isn't highlighted, and his face is only shown in one of them (the Keating ad), and even then it's very small. These are obviously not meant to be loud attention-callers to McCain's character, but instead are about faulty policies and plans. They are subdued and even, if possible, respectful (as compared, at least, to the GOP site). Here's the progression of the Obama site over time.

When you navigate to Obama's "Issues" page, the first thing you see is the link to download the "Blueprint for Change." Change is obviously Obama's main theme, and speaks both of him and of his audience. He is young and visionary--his voters are often the same. But this representation is just like all representations--limited. The "People" site I mentioned earlier points to just a few of the many diverse groups that identify with this visionary leader.

The page lists the issues alphabetically, so there is no meaning to be read from looking at the order. It does include Civil Rights, missing from McCain's site, along with Women, Urban Policy, Poverty, Faith, and more. Missing is any mention of gun control or abortion.

The candidate's TV ads also have a lot to say about both who they are and the audience to whom they are communicating. McCain's recent "Who Is Barack Obama" ad paints his supporters as making the "safe" choice, and anyone who votes for Obama as "too risky," "too dangerous."



But what do these words say? What do they mean? Congressional liberals (read: any liberals) do not have America's interests at heart. This is not a matter of disagreement. This is a matter of good and evil. This ad divides, and it calls its listeners to take sides.

Obama takes the idea of "risky" and uses it a different way. He calls McCain too risky for your finances...but he doesn't insinuate that by voting for him you're risking your life.



This is a "negative" ad that takes real images and facts from newspapers and lets the viewer add it all up. Obama supporters can think for themselves and don't need fear and terrorism images thrown at them in order for them to make a decision.

So far, I haven't brought up the candidates' running mates, but the blog Racialicious.com ties in Palin's "hockey moms" and "Joe Six-Packs" in a posting titled "An open letter to white voters, or what McCain really thinks of you." The post brings in everything from Palin's euphimisms for White to the new GOP idea that bringing out Obama's middle name--Hussein--will scare voters away.

Carmen Van Kerckhove, the author of the blog, writes:

The McCain campaign is doing its best to paint Obama as a shadowy Manchurian candidate who is un-American, unpatriotic, dangerous, sympathetic to terrorists, and possibly even a secret Muslim (needless to say, that’s a bad thing in their eyes).

That much is obvious.

But what does their strategy say about what they think of you, the white voter?

Judging from their messaging, they seem to be stereotyping white voters as closed-minded, paranoid, naive, xenophobic, and just a tad bit racist.

And they are certainly connecting successfully with people who match this profile.

In terms of representation, I thought this brought up a very interesting point. Who are McCain's voters, in his opinion? If Palin were to answer, she'd say White suburbanites, and while this answer makes many people comfortable and happy and "safe"--it marginalizes and disturbes so many others. What about me? I'm White, but I'm not suburban, or a mom, and I've never played hockey. I don't drink six-packs of beer. And my neighbors are Black and Muslim. Why should I vote for you?

Obama's voters, on the other hand...well that's harder to define. They are the "People" on his site, and they are anyone who identifies with his message of change. Some people have claimed difficulty relating to Obama as a person, and to his campaign, so this might be a case where the definition of who is being represented is murky. But I wonder--is that such a bad thing? Is it better for representation to be undefined than narrow?

(As I'm sure any reader has noticed, I have my own political biases, but I did try and look at each site with a critical eye during this research).