Reviewing Cholera

Moya Hilliam discusses modern media as the primary source that protects the greater public from ignorance about global events, in her blog “Playing the Blame Game”. She also points out that nowadays, with all of the different media resources, it is important to assess the different possible biases present.  During the Haiti cholera epidemic, Nepalese peacekeepers working with the UN were blamed for contaminating water sources and starting the crisis.  These reports about improper sewage systems sparked riots in Haiti.  The media, at first dismissed these riots as relating to the unstable political situation in Haiti.  As the riots became increasingly severe, and health officials began to examine the situation in depth, the media switched its focus to blaming the UN.  It began to accuse the media for dismissing the claims that they could have been responsible for the crisis. 

What should be taken from Moya’s blog is that the media is fickle, and willing to adopt whatever position seems most popular. This thought that Moya raised to my attention worries and scares me and makes me doubt what I actually watch on the news. The news always seemed like a valuable and trustworthy source for global information, but that I realise is a naive claim. So how do we find the truth in the stories that are relayed back to us from around the world?

In the article, The Sociology of News , Michael Schudson discusses social sciences contribution to how we interpret the news.  Sociologists like to point out that journalism can construct a viewer’s reality, and thus have to be looked at critically in order to gain a valid sense of what is truth and what is fiction.  He points out journalists do not go out of their way to create fictitious news stories; rather what they write about is actually their own reality.  Whether it is an accurate depiction is up for the audience to decide. The issue with this is what else can we base our opinion on? The chances of the viewer going to these foreign countries, especially those who have a cholera epidemic, are slim to none. So we are forced to review and interpret the stories that are given to us by the agencies.  Unfortunately, in news, Schudson states that news is something someone creates. A journalist wants to create a controversial and new story that has not yet been published, because that is what is going to attract viewers and effect ratings. Moya has pointed out that the journalist’s creation may simply switch sides time after time in order to avoid admitting they produced misleading information. Thus, the journalist creates the news as they see fit and leaves the viewer to deal with it.   

Looking at another student’s blog, which raises different questions about the media, Kakie Wong states the media has the power to bring much attention to a crisis in times of need in her blog “Images”.  She describes that the worldwide media was quick to cover the earthquake in Haiti and as a result shed much light, and money, on the situation.  However as new international disasters arose, such as the British Petroleum oil spill, the media took the emphasis off Haiti, and caused the situation to fall out of the public eye and into disrepair. 

Thus, looking at Kakie’s blog, one can find the media, is in part to blame for the current cholera epidemic. By not drawing attention to the problem at hand, how else is anyone going to find out about it? It appears Haiti is last year’s news. Kakie made me realize how much power the media has. Not only do they control the power to write the stories we hear, they control the power to not write stories that we will never hear. This is almost as bad as hearing misinterpreted information. Penelope Ploughman points out the hierarchal power news agencies have in her article, Disasters, the Media and Social Structures. Like Kakie, Ploughman points out that the news agencies “determine the salience of issues” (1997, 119).  She also discusses how our news agencies are one of the only sources we have to access global issues.  Thus, if a news agency chooses to overlook some topics, there is nothing viewers can do about it.

This is why classes like the Anthropology of Media are important, in order to draw our attention to global issues and current events.  If classes or other institutions do not help educate people about current events, who will? I have learned that we cannot solely rely on news agencies through both of these blogs.

Culture's in the Air

Radio has become a source of communication, connection and security for aboriginals all over. After reading Daniel Fisher’s article as well as watching the movie CBQM in class, I can see how much radio has to offer.  Through dedications, talk shows and information shared all over, communities that have been dispersed can find security and affection in one another once again.

In Australia, aboriginal groups have begun to connect through the shared communication on the radio.  There are radio shows dedicated to song requests which play music that allows different members of the community to contact relatives or share emotions with their kin, no matter where they are. These programs are not generally subject to the confines of local broadcasting, and so can enable members from all different regions to connect with one another. (2009 296) Increased interaction between different Indigenous groups can be noted since the advent of these radio broadcasts.

Song choice and dedications on the radio often reflect cultural issues such as separation due to governmental attempts at assimilation.  The music is indicative of problems that the entire communities of aboriginals are facing, despite their separation from one-another (2009 285). This commonality can bring aboriginals together, in a time that is more needed than ever.  Radio has also reshaped the aboriginal communities by bringing non-indigenous culture into communities that were previously isolated from all media that was not reflective of their own culture. 

A growth in the number of young aboriginals pursuing careers in broadcast journalism may be noted as a result of the increasing popularity of aboriginal media (2009 293).  This is an inspiring trend as it demonstrates that indigenous groups are showing an interest in the continued growth of their influence on media.  Though radio and other forms of mass media may have an effect on communities, the growth of Aboriginal presence in Australian media is testament to the fact that subjugated communities may have a large effect on the media.

Another source that reflects community is the movie, CBQM.  CBQM CBC Radio One Inuvik - is based in the hamlet of Fort McPherson in Canada’s North West Territories. Fort McPherson has a population of approximately nine hundred. More than eighty percent of the population is of Gwich'in descent. CBQM is a multilingual radio station that broadcasts a wide variety of community and native based material as well as the regular news. The most notable trait of the radio station is the sense of kinship that is brought about between the listeners. Like the radio stations in Australia, CBQM station accepts phone-in dedications.  In addition, it is quite common for local musicians and performers to give live performances for the listeners.  Though the musicians are not always professional quality, it is all in the spirit of community, and it leaves CBQM as a distinct broadcasting anomaly.  The radio station also welcomes a phone-in messaging system used by the community to broadcast a message to the listeners, or even to communicate directly with a certain friend or family member on a personal matter. CBQM is an unusual example of the broadcast journalism field that incorporates a heightened sense of community and belonging into the world of media.

Both CBQM and the radio stations in Australia offer support systems from afar, through personal song dedications, hearing familiar voices or being comforted from the sound of traditional cultural music. For these aboriginal cultures, radio has become a vital tool in keeping an otherwise dispersed community connected. Without it, the hope of these communities sticking together in

Remaking Culture

Ever since the television show, Glee, hit the airwaves in May 2009 it has been an instant hit.  Each week they take new songs to fit the theme of the episode and sing them in the classroom or on stage for a filled auditorium.  The songs they choose draw attention to modern pop culture issues. For example, in the episode “Alcohol”, the Glee club sings songs by the currently popular artists, Jamie Foxx and Ke$ha.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHvSBIqlYlY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlld2Tmho8&feature=related

Based off of David Novak’s ideas of acceptable use of reusing original works in media, I would say that most viewers would find no fault with the cast of Glee’s reproductions. Each week, the show draws attention to modern day pop culture issues such as alcohol consumption or teen pregnancy and while even the original pop songs are controversial, the Glee club manages to make these renditions acceptable; even more acceptable perhaps than the original version.  The show effectively discusses modern topics and educates youth through song. While Novak may worry that Glee paints youth’s picture as a drunk and sexually active group of individuals, Glee manages to side step this portrayal and stereotype through their fun and festive songs and dances.

 The acceptance and credibility given to Glee by viewers probably has something to do with the talent the cast contains.  These members who are doing the remakes of each song every week are in a show choir. A show choir’s purpose is to sing songs by other artists. If you are in a show choir, it also usually means you have talent and can sing well enough to sing these songs by the original makers.  Thus, the quality of these young actors makes the remake more acceptable.

Novak points out that any re-contextualization runs the risk of being interpreted as a mockery as opposed to a tribute.  However, the motives and intentions of Glee seem to be respectable and sincere. They are not making fun of the original artists, but rather paying tribute to them.  Not only do audience members see that their motives are decent, the artists themselves, or those who hold the rights to the original songs will agree. When you want to remake an artist’s original work, you have to get permission to do so. If the original artist does not agree with the vision the show has, they would not give them the rights to them.  This is drawn to my attention when fans and viewers criticized Glee for having few episodes and airing them far apart. The network and producers response to this is that it takes time for the legal work to be put through and for them to be able to air and produce a remake of a song. The show uses so many original songs per episode that one can see how much work and time would be put into this effort. Lucky for viewers though, artists do think Glee is a well worth cause to sell their rights to them, and thus this creates a more acceptable use of original media.

            On the other hand, an unacceptable remediated work can be found in Britney Spears rendition of “Satisfaction”, originally done by the Rolling Stones. Britney Spears added this to her concert tour in 2009, for a reason that I cannot quite come up with. The songs content, sexual intercourse, is not appropriate for Britney Spears’ fan base. Britney Spears can be seen as one of the more influential pop artists of the 1990’s, as many young girls and teenagers look up to her and her music. The influence she has over the youth and pop culture is of high measure, as fans watch and worship her every move. Novak explains how the remake is mediated and how it is received by viewers is heavily reliant on power relations, past cultural dominance and ignorance. Pop culture has a significant dominance and influence on youth today, and Novak would consider that Britney Spears’ ignorance to the subject matter of the song she chose to redo is inappropriate for the culture she is targeting in sales.  In the pop music industry, the artists have the power once they are made popular and thus Britney is misusing her power greatly by poorly influencing youth. Unfortunately, this remake, by Novak’s standards, is unacceptable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33Scz07BPlM

Y Tu Mama Tambien

The book Cinema: A Visual Anthropology, written by Gordon Gray, describes that in the 1970’s the study of psychoanalysis contributes greatly to the theoretical field of film. The early psychoanalyst, Lacan, influences Laura Mulvey’s theory of the male gaze in mainstream cinema. Mulvey discusses how males take pleasure in watching and interacting with the films they watch.  Pleasure is usually drawn from three major categories; identification, voyeurism, and fetishism.  (2010 59) Men typically watch film in order to identify with a strong male protagonist, imagine they are living the lifestyle of a character on screen, or view their sexual fantasies played out by another man in the world of cinema.  Applying Mulvey’s theory can help analyze the Mexican film, Y Tu Mama Tambien.

This Spanish film begins with two friends, Julio and Tenoch, having sex and then saying goodbye to their respective girlfriends before the girls depart on an excursion to Italy.  The boys then attend a wedding where they meet Tenoch’s uncle’s wife, Luisa. The boys find this older woman very attractive and attempt to impress her by inventing a trip to a beach they call “Heaven’s Mouth”.  She declines their initial invitation to accompany them, but when her husband confesses that he has cheated on her, she asks the boys if they will again extend the request.  The three set out on a road trip, although Julio and Tenoch have little idea where to find the promised beach.  One night, after they have checked into a motel, Tenoch visits Luisa to find her crying.  Luisa proceeds to invite, seduce, and have sex with him.  Julio sees them together and out of jealousy and anger admits that he slept with Tenoch’s girlfriend.  The following night, Luisa has sex with Julio, and Tenoch confesses that he too had slept with his friend’s partner.  The boys fight, and Luisa calms them down.  Continuing on their journey, they come to an isolated beach.  They spend the day there, and in the evening they all drink excessively and have sex together.  The following day the boys return home while Luisa stays at the beach.  The two do not remain friends for much longer.  The movie ends with a chance meeting of the two boys many years later, where it is revealed that Luisa had cancer and died a month after the trip, knowing all along what would happen. The two friends part and never see each other again.

According to Mulvey, Y Tu Mama Tambien is a film that many men can appreciate and find pleasure watching. This movie takes the man on a journey and the male viewer can seek and find control over Luisa.  Luisa is set out to be the older, experienced, seductive and attractive woman while the young boys are straddling the line between youth and adulthood. Mulvey would agree that many men can relate to this awkward and sexually driven transition as well as identify with these sexually successful boys. First, the boys are having sex with their girlfriends and then they even both manage to have sex with the older and experienced Luisa. Male viewers can appreciate this success as well as envision their chances with Luisa or another attractive woman.  Male viewers would not feel inadequate watching this film, because they would not believe to be any less than the two boys succeeding.  Thus, their pleasure intake is at an all time high during the viewing of this film.

Feminists tend to pay much attention to Mulvey’s theory because it gives them many reasons to criticize and attack cinema.  Mulvey’s theory is focused on male pleasure, thus by having feminists focus on the male, they argue that cinema draws attention and justifies male stereotypes and male domination.  Feminists are not thrilled that male viewers take pleasure in watching the male hero dominate the woman or her body. The male is looking at the female character as a sexual object of desire and thus this does not do much for the image of women in the minds of men.  Cinema allows and caters to this idea of male domination over the female subordinate. One can see why feminists are not keen on this subject matter that Mulvey theorizes about.

That being said, I could see feminists going either way, with dislike or like, for the film Y Tu Mama Tambien. While using Mulvey’s theory about the male gaze, they would dislike the film for promoting pleasure for men.  The male viewer sees Luisa as a woman who can be easily dominated, because even these two young fellows can score a chance with her. Yet, feminists may see the other side. They may give the power to Luisa, as she is the older and seductive party. Tenoch enters Luisa’s room looking for a towel as Luisa is in a manipulating state; she seduces Tenoch and instructs him sexually. The power is not in the young Tenoch’s hands, but rather in the more experienced woman’s hands.  She also makes the decision to have sex with Julio to even the score among the two friends.  All the while, these boys are just pawns in Luisa’s last journey, as she knows her life will soon come to an end. However, according to Mulvey’s theory, male viewers will probably never pick up on this twist of events, where the female is left with the power.

What do prisoners, Latika and Jamal all have in common? They all have the ability to break it down and dance their hearts out to the song Jai Ho. Yes that is right; Slumdog Millionaire has spread all over the world, literally all over. This includes a penitentiary unit in the Cebu Province in the Philippines.  Do not let the bright orange jumpsuits fool you because these prisoners could keep up with the best of the Bollywood dancers. As entertaining as this performance is, the reproducation and the original, I questioned whether or not this Slumdog dance accurately portrays Bollywood and Indian culture's style of dance.  I have some experience enabling me to recognize an authentic style, as I was exposed to this old genre of Indian cinema and dance as a child; my dad was born and raised in Sri Lanka. However, just to be sure, I wanted to further research this topic to understand what both the original and reproduction could tell us about culture.

Mumbai is mostly the setting for Slumdog Millionaire as well as the birthplace of the Bollywood cinema industry.  With a movie like Slumdog Millionaire, portraying India in a very visual and honest way, I assumed that the dance number at the end would resemble a typical Bollywood movie.  The original version has a good start as the movie ends and a dance number erupts on a train station platform. Bollywood dance numbers are usually explosive, colorful and entertaining like the original version, so it had that going for it.  It is also common for the hero or heroine to be the main focus of the dance, with the supporting troupe behind them. This can clearly be seen in the movie as well as the reproduction.  The original actors did not sing Jai Ho, nor did they pretend to. In Bollywood films the actors would lip sync, as most people in the film industry could dance and act, but not carry a tune.  In both the movie and the Bollywood genre the dance sequence is suposed to be random, spontaneous and a joyeous occasion. Thus, it is a fusion of Western styles and the Bollywood genre. It is safe to say that the original Jai Ho dance is influenced by the Bollywood genre, yet combining it with more modern times.  For a better visual and a better comparison, please follow this link to see a traditional dance found in a Bollywood movie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh57vIcDqxU.

So we can say that Slumdog Millionaire does not stray far from its roots with the traditional styles of Bollywood entertainment, even though the director adds his own modern twist on it. The Bollywood film industry has a strong link to cultural identity in India and that is shown and valued in the movie.  But looking at the two versions of Jai Ho, one can also learn about the prisons culture.

On one hand, we have learned about the Indian culture through the true representation in the movie. On the other, we have the reproduction featured in the Philippines in jail. Looking at the deatils of the two overall performances, one can see a few cultural familiarities.  For example, the reproduction's dancers are dressed in standard issue uniforms from the prison, and thus they are not wearing any traditional costumes. This seems like a given, as they are still prisoners despite the dancing and fun that seems to be occuring.  The dance is also done on a much larger scale and the inames move in complete unison.  I imagine the culture within the prison is used to moving in unison as a prison apears to be a structured place.  Prisoners listen and act when they are told to do something, so the sharpness of their formations and their movements reflect this cultural style.

I cannot help but wonder what Walker Benjamin would think while he watches this new reproduction.  Benjamin believes that transforming original pieces of work and copying them into a reproduction discredits the art.  WIth this reproduction process, the "aura" is lost that it once possessed and this is a huge disappointment in Benjamin's eyes. The "aura" can be found with the original work, when it was first created.  The "aura" follows this work of art through its historical journey.  With the vast amount of reproductions produced of the song and dance, Jai Ho, Benjamin would think the original has lost its complete meaning and value. Even a prison in the Philippines can access and recreate the dance.

While Benjamin would not be thrilled with the recreation of Jai Ho, I think this reproduction is actually a unique experience. Since it is not altered in a huge way, the original meaning can still be appreciated.  The dance moves are similar, the same track is used and the energy is still upbeat and enjoyable. Jai On prisoners, Jai ho.

References Cited

Benjamin, Wlater
1998: UCLA School of Theater: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. 1-12.

Youtube
2011 (2009) Official YouTube Version of Jai Ho from the end of the movie "Slumdog Millionaire". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRC4QrUwo9o, accessed February 2nd, 2011

Youtube
2011 (2009) Jai Ho: Remix. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTMUZ39UHgo, accessed February 6th, 2011

Youtube
2011 (2009) Bollywood dance style: Jab We Met, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh57vIcDqxU, accessed on February 6th, 2011

Writing on the Wall

Writing on the Wall

The phenomenon which we can observe all over the world is called graffiti. Graffiti has been around for centuries and has been the voice for many different groups. Graffiti has been used by political activists to advertise their political agendas, by street gangs to mark territories and by urban artists trying to voice their opinion in form of this “street art”. While graffiti has been around for 30 000 years, the hip hop culture and urban youth picked up on this new art style in the1960‘s. By this point, graffiti let people of all ages convey free speech. However graffiti was soon banned. Laws vary, but it is generally illegal everywhere.  Because of these laws and because of the association between graffiti and delinquents just acting out, graffiti has gained a negative stigmatism.

If you ask me, most of it is rather beautiful. I decided to take photos of this art because I wanted graffiti to be portrayed as something other than vandalism.  People generally think that all graffiti is vandalism.  However, it can be an artistic way to express an individual’s thoughts and feelings.  Some people express how they feel in song lyrics, others in poems or paintings; and some use walls or sidewalks as their canvas.  What’s so wrong with that?

OK, I am not completely naive and I see the possible issues here. Not all graffiti is aesthetically pleasing and some youth do mark walls to rebel and destroy property. If we let anyone write anything they felt like on the sides of buildings, or vehicles or sidewalks all of Vancouver could be plagued with paint of all sorts. It could be utter chaos. However, I do think the government should work with these artists and allow designated areas for these artists to and convey their work. There is something so free about picking up a spray can of paint and painting what you feel like. Their work involves less planning and the process seems less organized, yet the finished product still ends up like this:

Please see Figures 2, 3 and 4 for future reference. These are photos of graffiti from a series of shots I took in the heart of Downtown Vancouver.

Many of the photos I took of graffiti could have different meanings.  Much of the graffiti we see in Vancouver can be open to interpretation.  My interpretation of these photos could differ from someone else’s opinion. For example, in photo number one, they are two phrases we can identify. First, the words we see tagged are “take five”. Further up we see the word “flash”. The message I get from this inscription is that taking a break is a good thing.  Take five minutes for yourself and take things easy.  For the word “flash” this means to me that life passes you by, in a flash, in a moment.  So if you put the two phrases together, I think take a break and enjoy life because life will pass you by so fast and before you know, it is gone.

The tag on the dumpster saying “alive” makes me think what this could mean. What was going through the artists mind when he or she wrote this in an alley on a dumpster? Could it be that whoever wrote this could mean that this is their life, wandering alleys and they are wide awake of this realization? Could it be that they are happy that they are alive, despite what brought them to this dumpster? The possibilities are endless.

This is what fascinates me the most about graffiti. There is no manual with each tag you find on the street.  Instead, if you choose to, you can decipher a meaning on your own. It is like wandering through an art gallery without anyone to describe the paintings to you, so you interpret it in your own way. Graffiti for me is an art form. Graffiti is a way to speak openly about your thoughts and feelings. Graffiti is a way to mediate your message to the world. So when do we decide when, where and how this should be done? Who decides these outcomes? Is it right to take away freedom of speech, or put restrictions on it? These are questions I am left with; questions I will give much thought to every time I walk by a bridge tagged with writing or an old building marked by the artist who once was there.

Help Haiti, or Last Year's Cause?

Blog number 1

            What is medias role in providing help to those in need? For example, as people die every day in Haiti because of the spread of cholera, what can people learn about it from the news agencies we see today? Does CBC or CNN promote relief efforts by educating the viewers all over the world about the severity and facts of this issue? Or do they undermine and minimize the issue? These are all questions I hope to find answers to by looking at these two agencies networks. I also consider the reliability of these two news agencies, especially CBC, in order to decipher why or why not these agencies would help.

            I check in with CNN’s news casts first. CNN first reports the story on October 25^th, 2010 with its first article, Toll in Haiti’s cholera outbreak now above 150. Along with the article, a news cast was televised.  Images of women and children and other patients lie around clinics and the streets of Haiti. The urgency of care and the importance of this issue is portrayed from day one.  At first, the supplies seemed adequate for the spread of the disease but it is spreading faster than they thought. The UN minister of affairs reported that they would insure these supplies were replenished over time. A hundred and fifty people died within the first 48 hours of the cholera epidemic with numbers rising quickly every day.

            With the latest article reporting on January 12^th, 2011 from CNN, the death toll rose to over three thousand people. CNN provided updates on the death tolls almost every other day. What I like about CNN’s articles on the epidemic is that each journalist has a different angle. For example, you have informative articles about the cholera outbreak and the death tolls. Yet you also have articles from the aid workers point of view, as to why people have not given up on Haiti yet. This would be a personal take on the situation occurring, as the article interviews U.S aid workers in Haiti and asks them questions like why they are there and what they are doing.  These articles are applicable to all audiences, including those who care and want to help and whom find comfort in the fact that there are people helping out, as well as those who just want to know what is going on and how many people are dying because of it. In CNN’s case, media is taking a stand in supporting Haiti and CNN values this epidemic as newsworthy. Because of the constant coverage and the range of topics, help can be motivated and inspired from people who are willing and able, even without being directly linked to the horrific events.

            Turning to CBC’s coverage on the cholera epidemic I am left confused. As I looked to sort out how often they published news about the cholera epidemic, I expected to find almost as much as CNN published. However, I was sadly mistaken. By typing in Haiti cholera epidemic into the search engine and asked it to sort it by date, the most recent to be published was dated November 25th, 2010.  Not only was that a long time ago, and the death tolls have risen by almost double since then, according to CNN’s broadcast, the article itself confused me and also made me laugh! The article was titled, Afghan extension, Harry Potter movie and Haiti election. Could someone please enlighten me on the connection between Afghanistan, Harry Potter and Haiti? I couldn’t figure that one out. I also found it disappointing that not only did CBC not report heavily on the cholera epidemic in Haiti, it also only focused on the political election in Haiti, occurring at the same time as the epidemic. People are dying every day, yet politics takes precedence. This doesn’t make sense to me. Clearly CBC is not doing much to provide Haiti with relief efforts, nor is that a major concern of theirs.

            I tried hard to find an article only about the cholera epidemic, but this proved difficult. I did find one titled; Abbotsford nurse helps battle Haiti cholera, as it was published on January 3^rd, 2011. Again, the focus was less so on Haiti and more so about this wonderful and local nurse so generously giving her time and effort for the cholera epidemic.

            The political focus points to my first question’s answer. All news agencies in Canada are owned and regulated by the Canadian government. (Source) In 1936 the commonwealth of Canada deemed Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) as their Crown Corporation. In a crown corporation cabinet ministers are often the ones who hold shares among the company. The Canadian government therefor decides what the public hears about and thus owns the rights to what news is broadcasted. The Mandate of the Corporation states the following:

“the Corporation should be predominantly and distinctively Canadian; reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, while service the special needs of those regions; actively contribute to the flow and exchange of cultural expression; be in English and in French; reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada..” and so on.

            This ownership and mandate by the Canadian government gives you a hint as to what Canadian viewers will be reading about. The viewer will probably not get to read too much into the cholera epidemic in Haiti, or those death toll numbers, but you will get to read about the British Columbian who is helping with the disaster.  Canadians can therefore take pride in their country and their citizens. Or can we? Are we being sheltered and shielded from what is actually going on in the world because of the power of sensor ship that the Canadian government has over us? Perhaps. I turn my attention to non Canadian news agencies later on in this post in hopes of being more informed about the issues in Haiti. Luckily those are available to Canadians as well.

            My initial reaction regarding news coverage on the cholera epidemic, based on CBC’s articles, was that Haiti appeared to be last year’s news.  Haiti experienced a devastating earthquake and the whole world tuned in via CNN or BBC or CBC in order to get a glimpse of the action.  People seemed to be genuinely concerned and relief was a main focus in 2010. However, that was last year, and it now seems as if no one is trying to do anything about this cholera epidemic. I mean, how many bad things can happen to one country right? People can only do so much.

            WRONG. This cholera epidemic shocked me, it made me feel hopeless and sad. More and more people are dying in Haiti every day. Many forms of media seems to be ignoring Haiti currently and lack following up with the epidemic that is still claiming lives every day. Cholera does not just disappear overnight. So what does that tell us about our news agencies and media today? Do they help with world wide disasters in aiding their crisis, or do they hinder the epidemics? News agencies can choose to report that everything is being handled by the UN or other relief workers, giving viewers across the world (especially in the Western hemisphere) comfort that things are being worked out; therefor no need for anyone else to help. They can also choose to ignore the actually issue, like we see with CBC, in order to promote their own interests.  People are dying in Haiti, but who really cares? Canadians are not dying, but let us recognize the few figures who do want to help. In a way, I guess that story could inspire others to get off their couch and lend a helping hand. But in another, Canadians can hide behind their pride of their citizens helping out, and continue to tune into the latest Canucks game.

Personally, media has the power to help motive and mediate relief efforts in Haiti and in any crisis around the world.  CNN proves this to be true.  However, you also see that the motives construed in media agencies, as CBC portrays, can hinder and minimize the actual problem.  I think media should be used for the betterment of society, all societies at that, and not become just a business endeavour; but that is probably the cultural anthropologist and humanitarian in me speaking.

 References Cited

Askew, Kelly.

2002 Blackwell Readers in Anthropology: The Anthropology of Media. 1-13.

Gourevitch, Philip.

2010 The New Yorker: Alms Dealer. 102-109.

CBC Radio Canada

2011 (1991) Mandate. hhtp://www.cbc.radio-canada.ca/about/mandate.shtml, accessed on February 1st, 2011.

CBC Radio Canada

2011 (2011) History of CBC/Radio-Canada and Canadian Public Broadcasting. http://www.cbc.radio-canada.ca/history/, accessed on February 1st, 2011.