Final Paper Pages Due 4/24

Constantly bombarded by television and radio commercials, billboard advertisements, posters, and newspaper and magazine ads, and with countless consumer goods available to them, Americans are some of the savviest consumers in the world.  Consumption has come to be considered as American as apple pie, baseball, and the very form of government with which we define ourselves; it is so pervasive that American politicians and the electorate have combined consumption and the democratic process in a way that minimizes the importance of ideas and solutions and elevates the importance of brand familiarity and appearance.  The commercialization of the political candidate shows the pervasive and potentially destructive nature of consumption in American society, and in few elections has this been clearer than the 2004 presidential election between Republican incumbent George W. Bush, and Democratic challenger John F. Kerry.  Both candidates ran television commercials that attack the other and build themselves up as the best ‘brand’ to lead Americans.

            1952 saw the first television commercials for presidential candidates, and since then, politicians have increasingly relied on commercials to communicate with the American people, using them to breed familiarity and trust, foment confusion, and raise questions about the opposition candidates.  The 2004 presidential election featured fifteen ads approved by then-President Bush and the Republican Party, five independent ads promoting George Bush, fourteen ads approved by John Kerry and the Democratic Party, and six independent ads promoting John Kerry.  The imagery and narrative of the specific ads discussed in this paper—“Heart” and “He’s Lost, He’s Desperate” by John Kerry and the DNC, and “Wolves” and “Changing World” by George Bush and the RNC—unveil the true nature of advertising in American presidential politics.  In the commercials, each candidate is treated as a brand name product and the American consumer-voter is denied critical information as they are overwhelmed in a blizzard of American flags and other irrelevant images.

            Each of the ads put out by the candidates appeals to what Lizabeth Cohen refers to as the segmented consumer society; after World War II, with the development of advanced marketing techniques, American society was broken into new groups to be targeted by advertisers.  Politicians quickly took note, and since 1952, presidential commercials have become more and more targeted to different demographic groups.  As this has happened, information and opinions have taken an auxiliary role to basely appealing to these various demographic and political groups.

            “Heart” is a biographical commercial for John F. Kerry that acts to commodify the Democratic candidate.  The commercial begins with the mention of Kerry’s birth and upbringing; Kerry next briefly discusses his decision to fight in the Vietnam War, and several of the men he served with gives testimonial as to the quality of Kerry’s character; Kerry’s family is next featured prominently as they offer their view of the candidate; the commercial closes with an upbeat address to the American people and several pictures from Kerry’s career.  The entire ad is indistinguishable from a commercial for any other product that Americans may come across.  John Kerry being the relatively new and unknown ‘brand’ challenging the familiar Bush ‘brand,’ the commercial sets out to do several things.  First, the advertisement seeks to familiarize the American people with Kerry; we are given his place of birth, parents’ history, testimonial on his time spent in Vietnam, and family opinions.  Being familiar with a brand would ideally make the American people more comfortable investing in this relatively new ‘product’ on November 2^nd, 2004.  Additionally, the use of testimonials in the commercial is very similar to the celebrity endorsements that are often found in commercials for consumer goods.  Vietnam veterans and Kerry’s family testify as to the proven quality of the ‘product’ they are promoting in an attempt to convince the American consumer-voter that Kerry has been of immense value to his friends, family, and constituents, and if the American people will ‘buy’ him, he will give them the most value for their vote.  This ad appeals to veterans and those undecided voters who are unfamiliar with the Kerry brand.  Consumer-voters interested in specific issues are largely ignored in this ad.

            One of John Kerry’s attack ads, “He’s Lost, He’s Desperate,” at first features dark colors and an ominous voice that immediately launches into an attack on the better known Bush ‘brand.’  Seeking to make the American consumer-voter question his or her faith in the Bush brand, the ad accuses Bush of lying to the American people with regards to a debate between the candidates, and with regards to the run up to the Iraq War.  The ad asserts that “it’s time for a fresh start,” and it’s clear that the choice the American consumer-voter should make is to switch to brand Kerry.  In every scene featuring John Kerry, at least one American flag is in the background, and this again serves to remind the audience that the Kerry brand is patriotic and deserving of their vote, especially when compared to the alternative—a perplexed looking George Bush.  Unlike “Heart,” “He’s Lost, He’s Desperate” targets those voters who are interested primarily in the Iraq War; the entire commercial deals with Bush’s alleged lies in the run up to the war, and then angrily proclaims that “now we’re paying the price.”

            George Bush’s “Wolves” ad was one of the most widely discussed commercials of the election season.  This ad features eerie music and dark scenes from a forest, punctuated by brief shots of wolves; it ends with a pack of the animals leaping up and beginning to run towards the camera.  The ad’s purpose is to upset the consumer-voter and make them uncomfortable about ‘buying’ the Kerry brand; Kerry is labeled liberal, weak, and subsequently dangerous.  The wolves are representative of America’s enemies, and as they rouse themselves for the hunt in the last scene, it is easy to imagine that America’s enemies are mobilizing at the mere idea of the American consumer-voter rejecting the Bush brand for Kerry.  The appeal to fear in this commercial is extremely powerful, and serves as a reminder that it is the familiar Bush brand that has kept the wolves at bay for the past several years.  This ad uses fear to play to the national security issue consumer-voters.

            Another of Bush’s ads, “Changing World,” also relies heavily on emotional appeals.  As a child opens his front door, we see the sun rising over a world covered in inspiring video footage, and a voice tells us how the world is changing “in ways that astound.”  However, it then immediately switches to footage of tanks, men shooting guns, and other disturbing images and we learn that the world is also changing “in ways that terrify.”  Over pictures of families, children, the Bush’s, and nature, the audience is told that we “depend more than ever on our values—family, faith, and…freedom.”  The implication that the Bush brand provides all of these things is clear, and the appeals to families are equally obvious.  Two boys running off of a school bus, a father and his children hula hooping,  a young girl running off into the green distance—all of these things are available to the American consumer-voter so long as they choose to remain with the Bush brand. Finally, this ad appeals to family values consumer-voters who are already largely familiar with the Bush brand.

Notably absent from these four ads is any mention of Kerry’s or Bush’s positions on any issues.  When political candidates market themselves as brand names, then spectacle takes precedence over substance, and the American consumer-voter loses out.  Kerry must market himself as a new brand that offers more value for your vote; Bush must market himself as the familiar brand that has thus far been of great value to the American consumer-voter.

It's a start.

Essay #4

Anne Moody’s Coming of Age in Mississippi is a memoir scathing in its portrayal of the treatment of blacks at the hands of the white majority in the mid-century American South.  Although condemning much of the white majority, Moody refuses to play the victim and also does not let her fellow African Americans off the hook; throughout the novel she decries the disunity and seeming willingness of African Americans to bear the burdens of racial segregation and discrimination.  Moody’s inner dialogues and characterizations of the people she meets on her life journey help to convey her message that the Civil Rights Movement was not the monolithic uprising that many now consider it to be; fear, internal division, uncertainty and hopelessness meant that the Movement often wanted for participants, lacked direction, and was by no means certain to accomplish its goals of mass inclusion and the betterment of life for African American across the nation.

            Many of the people that Anne Moody encounters in her first twenty-three years challenge her assumptions and ideas, aggravating her as they conform to roles that she sees as destructive and contrary to the social progress she and the Civil Rights Movement seek. 

One of the characters whose acceptance of the status quo most aggravates Anne is her mother Toosweet.  Toosweet is representative of the older generation of African Americans who were “too scared and suspicious…[and who] had been conditioned to Mr. Charlie’s do’s and don’ts [to the point at which] it was almost hopeless to try and educate [them]” (Moody 364).  Toosweet grudgingly accepts her place in American society and tries repeatedly to force Anne into the same acquiescence.  Instead of pushing Anne to try her best and make a life for herself, Toosweet tries to guide Anne’s life as she sees fit, going so far at one point as to begin “hoping [Anne] would marry Hicks” the basketball coach in her misguided belief that this represents the best opportunity that will be presented to Anne ( 200).

Toosweet’s frequent letters to Anne also symbolize the range of emotions felt by African Americans as their fellow citizens tried to upset the ‘natural balance.’  These letters are marked with “dried up tears” and the word choice as Anne recalls it conveys the complex emotions—such as dread and anger—felt by many African Americans, as when Toosweet “[forbids Anne from going] to the convention…[and threatens] to kill [Anne] herself,” but also tells her of the fear she feels for her (285).  When Anne gets “so mad after her [letters],” the reader also experiences a sense of frustration towards Toosweet (286).  Moody describes the letters and her reactions so that the reader gets a better sense of the division that plagued African Americans and in doing so recognizes the often precarious standing of the Civil Rights Movement.

On the many occasions that Anne asks her mother about race dynamics in American, Toosweet inevitably gives a curt answer and gets “so mad that [Anne gets] scared…she might hit [her]” (26).  Through these frequent dialogues between mother and daughter, Moody shows the unwillingness of many African Americans to confront the social inequities they experienced, and how this inertia threatened to stop the Civil Rights Movement.  Through these examples, Anne shows the reader that open dialogue was key to moving forward on Civil Rights.

Through the characterization of numerous minor characters, Moody also shows the divisiveness of the many ideas in the Movement.  The militancy of her sister Adline, who suggests that African Americans “need to blow Woodville and Centreville off the map and kill all of them bastards” (393), is in agreement with other nameless characters who push for the SNCC and CORE to “[become] more militant” (310).  However, Moody portrays other characters, such as fellow activist George, as opposing a militant stand.  Although he never outright voices opposition to violence and militancy, in interacting with Moody he expresses shock at her sudden outburst against religion and nonviolence, incredulously asking, “hold it—is that…the Nonviolent Miss Woolworth?” (350).  The interactions that Moody describes throughout her memoir reveal the many differing opinions that African Americans held, and how the sometimes bitter arguments that arose from these differences threatened to stall and reverse the gains brought on by the Civil Rights Movement.

Through these characterizations, Anne Moody shows that the Civil Rights Movement was threatened by inactivity and fear in the African American community, and also by divisions amongst African Americans and other activists with regards to the direction of the movement.  However, the conflicts were not limited to the various groups involved in the Movement; Anne Moody’s inner dialogues are frequent, contradictory, and thus provide numerous examples of the many varied internal conflicts many African Americans experienced.

Throughout her life, Anne holds many different views regarding the methods and goals of the Civil Rights Movement, moving from complete ignorance of the various rights organizations to active membership.  The rapid evolution of Anne’s goals and ideal means reflect the various positions held by different African Americans involved in the Movement and show the reader how varied those involved in the Civil Rights Movement were and how such confusion and lack of consensus threatened the Movement.

Upon originally joining various Civil Rights organizations, Anne, like many others, sees “voter registration [as] number one on the agenda” (310); many African Americans, and according to Anne especially the older generation, believed that this in turn would lead to the social change so many sought. However, as Anne perceives a lack of progress, she begins to change her ideas on how best to empower blacks; at one point she “[opposes] the freedom election…[only eventually] reluctantly [agreeing] to try to get votes” (364).  At times, Anne struggles with the belief that “nonviolence is through,” and expresses a desire to move beyond the peaceful protests and sit-ins and into a phase of large-scale demonstrations and violence (350).  Anne at times also expresses the belief that groups such as the NAACP must be “able to replace the crumbs that Mr. Charlie is giving…[and have African Americans] work hard and stand up to be [men]” (376).  Anne’s varied ideas, shown to the reader through her inner dialogues, are reflective of the numerous directions activists wanted to take the Civil Rights Movement; these various ideas and resultant conflicts are all examples of the discord that threatened to tear apart the Civil Rights Movement.

            Anne Moody’s memoir at its most basic core is a story of one group’s attempt at inclusion, acceptance, and understanding in mainstream American society.   Moody uses Coming of Age in Mississippi to argue that the common conception of the Civil Rights Movement as a unified, monolithic front is wrong and that the desperation of different segments of African American society to gain inclusion almost paralyzed and destroyed the Movement.  Different ideas of what it meant to be ‘included’ in American society meant that much of the older generation was fine with de jure inclusion and de facto discrimination.  As Moody shows through characters such as those that promote violent demonstrations, inclusion was considered to be worth any cost by some; others looked to peaceful demonstrations and sit-ins to gain inclusion in mainstream America.  Regardless of who held what belief, Moody shows that the varying ideas about whether or not to seek inclusion, and how to go about doing so threatened the Civil Rights Movement and is today largely ignored by Americans who view the Movement as one unified front fighting for specific, commonly accepted goals when in fact this was not the case.

            Coming of Age in Mississippi is a highly critical memoir that author Anne Moody uses to look inside American society in the 1940’s,  -50’s, and -60’s.  Although Anne Moody skewers white America, she also directs her condemnation to African Americans.  Throughout the novel, Moody gives the reader access to the internal struggles that plague her and cause so much anguish. These internal struggles are characteristic of the various positions held by activists in the Civil Rights, and just as these struggles leave Anne feeling as if there is “a heavy weight on [her] heart…[and that she is] unable to move,” these divisions within the Movement threatened to paralyze and reverse any gains activists made (394).  Outside of the Movement, Moody characterizes such people as Toosweet as being sadly accepting of their lot in life, unwilling to upset the status quo, and anxious when others try do so.  Through these techniques, Moody shows her readers that the different approaches to inclusion meant that the Civil Rights Movement was rarely, if ever, a cohesive group with common means and ends.

It's like 5 and 1/3 pages, and possibly a bit too heavy on summarization of the memoir and too light on analysis, but it's just a rough draft that hopefully gives you an idea of what it is I'm trying to say in this essay.

Assignment 3 Rough Draft

It's really rough, but here's my draft for paper 3--

            The explosion of new popular media in the 1920’s and thirties allowed Americans everywhere to partake in the rapidly developing mass culture.  Paintings, photographs, murals, and films all helped to establish common experiences, which defined a unified idea of the American way of life. The American way of life was one in which an American would temporarily suspend his individuality to become ‘just another cog in the machine.’ In doing so, he betters his lot, the lot of his fellow countrymen, and perpetuates the idea of an American way of life founded on common experience and commitment to something larger than the individual. This could take the form of working for the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Public Works Administration, the Tennessee Valley Authority, or just settling into the anonymity of a movie theater along with sixty million of your fellow Americans; either way, in joining a group, the individual is helping to “reinforce a social order rapidly disintegrating under economic and social pressures” (Susman 1).

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was an ardent supporter of the idea that everyday Americans should commit themselves to something larger than themselves so that they may help the United States recover economically, socially, and psychologically. In his speech to the members of the Commonwealth Club in California, Roosevelt proclaims that the times and circumstances in which the country found itself are cause for “man to stop and think of the deeper meaning of things, when he stands in this community” (Roosevelt 2). Here it is clear that Roosevelt wants Americans to pause in their pursuit of individual gain and consider doing good for themselves and for the community as a whole. Roosevelt also praises those in his audience who “are thinking…beyond their own personal interests” (2). Roosevelt believes that these are the people who are truly living an American lifestyle—taking care of their own affairs, but simultaneously mindful of the state of things beyond their own interests.  Invoking the establishment of representative democracy, Roosevelt again calls for Americans to move beyond “[conduct] for the benefit of the few” (3), and reminds Americans of our common heritage, which ultimately ties us into a larger sense of American identity.

Roosevelt’s New Deal programs enabled Americans to cast aside their individualistic tendencies, recommit to common ideals, and offered them the opportunity to be involved in group work that would not only benefit themselves, but all of the United States. In tough times, it is easy to retreat into one’s own world and forsake everyone else. Roosevelt did not see this as an option and so established the Public Works Administration, Civilian Conservation Corps, and Tennessee Valley Authority—examples of programs that Roosevelt created in order to promote and enact his belief that Americans must be willing to—at least momentarily—shed their individualism and become a cog in the machine. Roosevelt saw this as the only way in which American society could be saved by the turmoil wrought by the economic crisis. These programs provided jobs to the unemployed and immense benefits to those for whom the projects were completed; most importantly, however, they gave the young men who partook a sense of collective purpose and identity that tied them into what it meant to be an American.

The murals subsidized by the federal government focus on the themes that Roosevelt eschewed: unity, cooperation, common goals, and shared experiences. One such mural, “Development of the Land,” is a perfect manifestation of such ideas. When looking at the mural, the first thing to draw attention is the huge man located on the left of the mural. He is racially ambiguous, and because he is neither clearly black nor clearly white, any man looking at the mural can imagine himself in that place. The man’s face is also very poorly defined, further allowing an individual to put himself in his place, and underscoring the importance of suspending one’s individuality to work cooperatively for the greater good. This underscores Roosevelt’s message of collectivism, that New Deal projects are for everyone, by everyone. The farmer’s size is also important to note; being greater than any one man, the viewer gets the sense that he symbolizes the group—a unit larger than any single component.

In the back right-hand corner of the mural, three men are helping logs downriver. These men, much like their larger counterpart, are of indistinguishable race and identity. This again emphasizes the idea of becoming a cog in the machine largely lacking identity. Anyone could imagine themselves doing this group work.

The nature of the work that the men are doing is also important to note. Roosevelt placed great emphasis on doing work that not only benefits the laborer, but that benefits the rest of the country as well. The jobs depicted in this mural here are of enormous value not only to those laboring, but also to those on the receiving end of the supply chain. Although there were many non-agricultural New Deal jobs available, the ideas of an American way of life—hard work and giving to a larger cause—are portrayed via the farmer and lumberjacks. Both are labor-intensive jobs that provide compensation not only to the laborer but to America as a whole.

“Development of the Land” is a successful piece of visual culture because of the various American ideals it portrays; the indeterminate nature of the workers allows for an interpretation that anyone can partake if they just join in the collective American experience, and the nature of the work portrayed hits home the idea that the American way of life is one in which people work hard and work together to bring profit not only to themselves, but to Americans everywhere.

 Another important government sponsored mural is “Industrial Life,” by Seymour Fogel. Just like “Development of the Land,” “Industrial Life” portrays several young men doing various jobs, likely under the auspices of a New Deal program. As with the other New Deal mural, several of these young men are racially ambiguous and have obstructed or ill-defined faces. The mural was likely painted this way so that just as before, any man could see this mural and imagine himself in any of their places. The work featured in the mural is varied, running the gamut from manual labor to what seems to be chemistry, all important to promoting the greater good of the United States.

In the mid- and background of the mural, a man is operating a machine comprised of two large cogs; his rigidity and obscured face give the impression that he is a part of the machine that he operates. This plays into Roosevelt’s belief that Americans must forego their senses of individuality in pursuit of worthwhile work for the betterment of the American people.

The murals painted in the time of the New Deal provided not only jobs to the unemployed, but also acted as a kind of propaganda. The murals depicted Americans and American life as Franklin Delano Roosevelt envisioned it: the average American commits himself to something greater, sacrificing his individual identity in the process so that he may better his lot, and that of his countrymen. The ambiguous characters and type of work featured in these murals promoted these ideals and helped in the economic and psychological recovery of the United States.

Essay #2--Making Cultural Claims In Turn of the Century America

Looked down upon and barred from fully participating in society, African Americans living in turn of the century America had to develop a way to work within the white dominated social system while maintaining and evolving their own culture.  African Americans and their allies were able to counter the demeaning signification of the times and establish themselves as fully American by changing the literature, music, goods and ideas that as a group they produced and therefore consumed; this in turn helped to change the assumptions that the majority white society held with regards to the African American population.

African Americans of the time period seized upon the idea of ‘democratization of consumption’; that is, they were emboldened to partake in the consumption but also saw and quasi-emulated what it was that the majority was consuming.  Harlem became “the pulse of the Negro world” and acted as a mecca of black culture from which African American culture poured (Locke, par. 23).

White Americans at the turn of the century would have subscribed to and read newspapers and magazines, presumably some so that they would seem worldly, especially in contrast to the supposedly unintelligent and unsophisticated African American minority. Attempting to combat misperceptions and raise their intellectual and cultural stock in the eyes of the white majority, African Americans living in Harlem began publishing an international newspaper written in several different languages.  This newspaper ran for over five years and was proof to the white majority that white claims on intellectual curiosity and capability were not unassailable, and that the African American community could not be so readily discounted.   Two major national magazines were edited in Harlem, lending further credence to the African American assertion that blacks were every bit as intellectual and aware as their white counterparts.  In producing and consuming these major news sources, African Americans gained intellectual territory that whites had unilaterally claimed, and showed themselves to be on par with the white majority.

Music offered African Americans another opportunity to show themselves to be sophisticated, talented Americans of equal value to the white majority.  James Reese Europe of the 369^th US Army Regiment and his Clef Club Orchestra were wildly popular and provided entertainment not only to white Americans but to white Europeans as well.  The widespread success of the band showed African American society to be innovative and equal, not a cultural backwater.  The mass consumption of the music amongst the white majority ensured that it would continue and constantly be perfected by the African American musicians who honed the genre.  Although jazz was viewed as unrestrained and almost primitive, its broad appeal put African Americans on the same level—and quite possibly ahead—of their white counterparts in this aspect of culture.

African Americans forced themselves upon white society with regards to consumer goods; if producing such models of culture as jazz would not allow African Americans entrance into mainstream society, then they would emulate what they believed white society was and what white society wanted. The size and opportunity of the African American consumer market could not be denied in the same way that their assertions of equality were.  As a result, of the three niche markets that were present in the early cosmetics industry, one—the ‘ethnic’ market—was dedicated to African American consumers (Peiss, 373).  As cosmetics took hold over the imaginations and purses of white American women, African American women wanted to be a part of what they perceived as an opportunity to make cultural claims for themselves and put themselves on equal footing with the white majority. The ‘ethnic’ market consumed large amounts of skin bleachers and other various cosmetic products in an attempt to assimilate into white society. In becoming more like those denigrated them, African American women hoped to move beyond being second-class citizens. African American entrepreneurs such as Madame C.J. Walker were able to bring themselves to a level of society that few white Americans achieved, and in doing so made a major claim for African Americans as equal to their white counterparts; such success clearly negated any assertion that African Americans were any less capable than white Americans.  The consumption of upper-class clothing was also an attempt at asserting African American cultural and social equality. James Van Der Zee’s Harlem photography depicts African American families impeccably dressed and partaking in what may be considered ‘white’ and ‘upper-class’ activities such as going to a salon or playing or listening to the piano. Again, African American families here tried to include themselves in the activities of the ‘dominant’ white culture.

The single most effective manner of establishing equality and making cultural claims was through the production and consumption of news ideas and theories on the part of the African American community. Writers and thinkers such as Alain Locke developed the idea of the “new negro,” an African American archetype who rejected the “historical fiction…[and] shadows” of the past (Locke, 1). This group sought to make a clean break with the past stereotypes and expectations of African Americans, and to prove that modern day African Americans should be treated as social and cultural equals. Widespread consumption of the ideas that came out of this movement was the most important factor in making and backing up claims for equality because it showed that African Americans were capable of articulating their grievances, were able to spot white-perceived faults, and were willing to take action to correct and disprove these supposed flaws in their culture and very beings. African Americans also made claims for full ‘Americanship’ by not only mentally and emotionally distancing themselves from the past, but by doing so physically as well. The diaspora of African Americans out of the South and into the North and Midwest in search of jobs helped to break the white impression of the African American as a Southern cultural and intellectual child. African Americans took jobs in white-dominated fields such as the army, and in doing so showed themselves willing and capable of doing the same work as white Americans.

In developing a vibrant culture that both borrowed from white culture and innovated, African Americans in turn of the century America tried to reject white American assertions that they were not fully American, but were rather intellectually and culturally at the same level of development as white Americans. In the ‘democracy of consumption,’ African Americans could partake in the same activities and buy the same goods as white Americans, in some cases improving upon what the white Americans developed. Where the ‘democracy of consumption’ failed to be inclusive, African Americans developed different aspects of their own culture, creating such popular cultural touchstones as jazz. Although the democratic nature of consumption in turn of the century America did not immediately yield fruit in regards to equal rights, it allowed African Americans to further develop their own culture alongside that of white America’s, which would eventually lead to full legal, social, and cultural equality. 

Generalization

Despite expectations to the contrary, I found that many inauguration attendees were not as unified as MSNBC would have had me believe. Some people shouted as others shoved past them, trying to get to the front of the crowd; others shoved back. Shouting matches occurred when some spectators booed former President Bush and others decried said behavior. There was without a doubt a degree of disconnect between what was reported, and the actuality on the mall; however, MSNBC's coverage colored the behavior of some people, as in the those who begged others for unity, because that's how we were "supposed to behave."

So in not as many words:

MSNBC's coverage focused on what they felt should have gone on; some people presumably saw such coverage and tried to model their behavior after what was expected; despite this, there was a disconnect between reporting and reality.

First Observations--MSNBC

I watched MSNBC's Inaugural coverage this weekend, and saw many of the same aspects of myth-making that I would have expected from a network with a slight liberal slant.

Throughout the weekend, MSNBC frequently showed the most famous lines from FDR's, Kennedy's, and Reagan's inaugural speeches--"nothing to fear but fear itself," "ask what you can do for your country," and "government is the problem, not the solution." I considered these tautologies, in that they imply not necessarily accurate comparisons to these historic presidencies.

MSNBC also made frequent mention of the number of people expected to show up on the mall for the Inauguration, coupled with aerial shots of huge crowds gathered. This may be an example of quantification of quality, in which the network played up the greatness of the inauguration by asserting that record-breaking crowds would be present.

Anchor Keith Olbermann brought up Obama's political moderation thus far; if Republicans accept all of Obama's cabinet appointments, Obama wins. Conversely, if they reject his appointments and proposals, Obama still wins because he had the appearance of bipartisanship. This was an example of neither/norism, where the inability of opponents to nail Obama down as far left or center left makes him more appealing.

An example of inoculation in the coverage came when an anchor made brief mention of how burdensome the job of presidency is, and how Obama has been receiving daily intelligence briefings that must be deeply disturbing, and then immediately after proclaimed the greatness of this inauguration and how historic it was.

Another example of neither/norism may be frequent discussion of Obama's bipartisan dinners honoring John McCain, Colin Powell, and Joe Biden. By appearing bipartisan and moderate, Obama appeals to a larger base of people.

Although I'm not exactly sure which aspect of myth making this may fall under, MSNBC anchor Tamryn Hall at one point called the Hudson River plane crash and an instance in which the host of Top Chef saved an author's life "Obama miracles." Her co-anchor responded that soon Obama would be "walking on water."

MSNBC anchor David Schuster utilized statement of fact when he said that "there is no doubt that the entire country is electrified right now, and that history is about to be made." The 40-something percent of the country that did not vote for Obama is likely not terribly electrified about his presidency.

One anchor also claimed that "there is not one person in the world today who does not feel like they are basking in sunlight, despite the cold weather."

While speaking with Chris Matthews, Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter claimed that people "will be talking about this hundreds of years from now," which could be counted as statement of fact.

It was also said that there is "no longer any doubt that we can be one country," which is an example of statement of fact and possibly identification.

8:15 Edit

More things I noticed but did not have time to blog about:

Ted Kennedy's medical emergency and Robert Byrd's (apparently non) medical emergencies received coverage when they first occurred; however, once details were confirmed I didn't hear much of anything about them the rest of the night. Instead, Michelle Obama's dress selection was the topic of conversation. Unless this latest seizure marks the beginning of a very rapid decline in Ted Kennedy's health, I'm not sure that in the future this occurrence will be remembered. The medical emergency pushed back the parade an hour; I think it's funny that we had used this possible hitch as an example of inoculation and privation of history in discussion section.

First Ever Post!

So here's my first post for my American Studies blog.

On the sheet with directions for setting up our blogs, Professor Palmer told us not to worry too much about what we write here for our first post; so to fill up a little more room, I'll just put it out there that I went to Froggy Bottom for dinner tonight. It was all right.