I used to think it was a little silly to accessorize your birth control pills, but hey, why not? I do like that it’s functional in that it has a built in timer (at the same time it upsets me to think about the implication that women are to absentminded to remember to take daily medication…that’s a different topic).

I remembered people having these when I was younger, and I didn’t think twice about why something like this was produced in the first place–it just existed. Looking back, it seems like this would be a good way to bring the issue of birth control pills into conversation. Although I couldn’t figure out if this is the case or not, it would make sense for the producers of birth control pills to support the sale of “designer” birth control pill cases because of the increased lip service that it could lend to the medication. After all, why buy a pretty case for something unless you mean for someone to see it?

Also, as a sidenote, I had always thought that the fancy accessories were only available for certain brands of birth control pills (not sure where I got that idea…I vaguely remember a commercial of some kind, but couldn’t find one youtube). Anyhow, it turns out I was wrong, cases are produced for various kinds of pills, but not nearly for all of them (at least not from that company). From my basic knowledge of birth control pills, I did notice that three of their cases was designed to fit Ortho-tri-cycleen pills while the otherkinds generally only had one shape to choose from. The pills are packaged differently from most other pills so the standardization of the pretty commercial cases doesn’t apply as readily to them. Maybe this was also intentional, to make even the shape of the packaging distinct to the brand of pill…

This video is actually the trailer for a movie called Big Pharma Big Bucks, the entire video was available on youtube broken down into parts so I started watching part of it, and I was most surprised by how irrational people can be (once again…how silly of me). I’ve noticed that television commercials for perscription drugs often don’t tell the viewer what the medication is intended to cure. I had always thought that this was because those people who need the medication already know what it’s for and they were just advertising different brands/choices in order to influence people’s decisions that way. Turns out, the commercials are taking the postmodern approach by marketing an idea, or a state of being that can supposedly by achieved by taking the drug, not the medication itself. I was shocked to hear the people actually ask doctors for perscriptions for drugs when they don’t even know what they are for!

I suppose that’s the ultimate in effective advertising–being able to sell something to people without telling them what it’s for.

What happens when people see the sign with no prior knowledge about the demographics and attitude in Bloomington/Normal (much like my lack of knowledge about Arab stereotypes)?

I would just take the sign at face value. After all, why not? It’s clearly an official sign that was placed there by some kind of governing organization (or at least it gives that impression). If I didn’t already know about Uncle Tom’s Pancake House I would likely also overlook the coincidence(?) of the proximity of that to the sign. This whole situation just reminded me of what seems to be the underlying message from this entire course–you won’t notice rhetorical devices as such unless you’re looking for them or already know they’re there (if they’re presented effectively).

I was originally not interested in it at all (in fact, I almost didn’t watch it), but when I saw how short it was I decided to go for it. I had watched some of the other video clips first, thy focused on race(black v. white), class and gender–all topics I’ve been previously exposed to. Although they did make their points with different arguments, overall, they served only to reaffirm my previous thoughts about representation of those particular groups. Arabs, however, are a group that I had never taken an interest in studying, so when I did watch the video clip, I realized that I myself had consumed many of the media representations of that group, and never thought to challenge them. I hadn’t realized that there were specific character-traits associated with Arabs in the media, but when I saw them pointed out I realized that I myself had been interpellated enough by these images in the media to not notice that I was seeing them (if that makes sense).

Anyhow, the point is, it’s one thing to explain concepts like the influence of representations of groups of people in the media, but it’s another thing entirely to make the viewer realize how pervasive an issue it is by making them realize that they themselves are not above its influence.

Ed Hardy MUST rely on a postmodern interpretation in order for the branding to be affective. Modernism as I understand it would rely on the association of the brand with the designer…it just seems more logical overall. Anyhow, after a little research I realized that Christian Audigier isn’t just some guy who makes up Ed Hardy designs on his own, they’re based on tattoos done by someone who’s name was (surprise!) Ed Hardy. With this in mind, a modernist interpretation might be appealing to a consumer because it would associate the brand’s clothing with something aside from the end result.

The problem seems to be that the average consumer might not know where the idea for the brand came from. I thought Christian Audigier was just some middle-aged man who drew pictures of mediocre quality with pretty colors and was able to successfully brand himself in a very “cool” light.

This is what makes me associate Ed Hardy with a postmodern interpretation–postmodern thought doesn’t rely on the logical association of the brand with a significant or credible origin/intention, it simply associates a feeling (I’d describe it as a vibe) with the product. That means that Ed Hardy isn’t necessarily selling clothes, or designs, it’s selling an image, that allows the wearer to assimilate the trendiness of the brand into his/her own identity. Sounds like a pretty lofty notion, but it seems appropriate that the consumer recieve an improved identity with the purchase of a $100 shirt…you know…$7 for the shirt and $93 for the vicarious identity.

Postmodernism is exceedingly difficult to define because it’s not about definition, it’s about ideas. My favorite point from the text was the idea that postmodern marketing didn’t try to sell a brand, but instead, an image or a feeling that was to become associated with it.

Overall, it seems to me that modernism and postmodernism don’t necessarily differ in the products that they produce so much as the meaning of the products differs because of interpretation. This was definitely the most insightful notion that I’ve come across in regard to theory–the fact that it’s not necessarily a code for how to produce things within a certain era so much as a way of thinking.

The point that the surrounding article was trying to make was that all the lables had a similar color scheme. (ironically) But what I noticed was that all the barbecue sauce is roughly the same color, that’s what lends itself to the similar colored packaging. It reminds me of the time when Heinz tried making different colored Ketchup and it didn’t go over too well. Why is it that manipulation of the packaging is acceptable while changing the color of the product is not?

Even so, I think it might be a good thing that companies are trying to imitate each other’s packaging, it seems to me to devalue it a little. Maybe similar packaging will cause consumers to be less influenced by the “pretty packages” and begin to make choices based on the contents (this isn’t something that I believe shoppers will consciously do–packaging will always be important to guide the uninformed in their decision-making–but maybe it will have a subtle influence).

One of the articles makes a good point–if everyone is allowed to monopolize a color/color combination eventually there would be none left for use by others. This just makes sense to me, it’s possibly the most logical point in the color marketing arguement. Although there exists a seemingly endless array of colors, the fact remains–the number of possible colors is finite–like elements. Just imagine if only one company could make things out of iron or aluminum! (I know it’s extreme, but you get the picture). Plus, if colors are fair game, it causes other elements of packaging of products to be enriched. Allowing companies to copyright color combinations just seems to easy to me–they should have to work and be creative in order to attract customers.

One of the writing samples looked like this:

Needless to say, the margins are not of a conventional size. After analyzing the document according to White’s standards I believe that, although the margins appear to be backwards with the sinkage (large top margin) at the bottom of the page, the actual attempt here was simply at left alignment without any conscious top or bottom margins. It seems the student just ran out of text before the page was filled. Although I know little about child development, I did find it interesting that the tendancy for left alignment developed earlier than that for top/bottom margins in this student. Make what you will of that.

Leading (spacing between lines) is also present but inconsistently executed.I’m not necessarily listing this as a major fault of the piece at all. I just found it worth noting that this quality is usually not left up to the writer in our society since most of the paper on which handwriting occurs is lined. When I say “lined,” I am referring to horizontal lines. I know that in some European cultures handwriting is often executed on what Americans would refer to strictly as “graph paper.” After looking at this example, I see how children might benefit from this practice. This student seems to have an issue with word/character spacing much more than line spacing. Having vertical lines as a guide might encourage consistency in this spacing, and make it easier to see (or teach) the size difference between word spacing and character spacing.

Then again, maybe the oddly spaced characters/words were just an unintentional yet surprisingly successful attempt at line justification?? The resulting consistent line length (although it seems to be caused by the right edge of the paper, it could be done with conscious intention) creates a extremely “soft rag” (slightly variable right edge).

Although this piece is lacking in many of the technical elements that are considered desirable in written work, this student seems to have a basic understanding of the idea that spacing is a factor in writing, and he has used it to create a relatively consistent rectangular mass of text near the center of the paper. Why certaing aspects of the text manifest themselves the way they do is beyond me, but I find it notable that even children take into consideration spacing conventions that more seasoned writers often take for granted.

Readability- “Whether an extended amount of text–such as an article, book, or annual report–is easy to read”

What makes something more readable? Answer: classic serif fonts, moderate line weight and contrast, “normal” x-height, no exaggerated features on the individual letters, appropriate capital letters and spacing. Ok, so pretty much, the point is–the more simple and common the font looks the more readable it will be. It doesn’t sound very exciting, but it doesn’t have to be. Just think about it, after you look at a font for a while the novelty starts to wear off (no matter how appealing it looks at first) then what are you left with? Just a bunch of writing that you have to struggle to read. Decorative fonts just don’t make sense for large amounts of text.

Williams did suggest one strategy for increasing readability if you really want to use a slightly more complex font: decrease the line length! This makes sense because it makes the text less dense and easier for the reader to process.

Legibility- “Whether a short burst of text–such as a headline, catalog listing, or stop sign–is instantly recognizable”

Many of the same characteristics make type legible that make them readable. the main difference is that the text is shorter so must be recognizable. Pretty much–viewers shouldn’t have to take time to try to decrypt your message, they should just immediately recognize it. Seems that legibility is an issue for things like advertising or signage where the name of the product/command should be immediately recognizable.