The "V" Word

Due to the horrible event that happened in Tucson, I have noticed several words floating to the top of the news reports that aren't often used or at least I haven't noticed them. One of the words is "vitriol". Vitriol has several meanings:
As a noun it means sulpheric acid - a highly corrosive stubstance.
As a noun it can also mean abusive or venemous language used to express blame or censure or bitter deep-seated ill will.

It appears that across the board (conservative/liberal/others) news reports are using this word. Here are a few of those reports(from Google):
As portrait of Jared Loughner sharpens, 'vitriol' blame fades (The Christian Science Monitor, January 12, 2011)
Arizona Sheriff Blasts Rush Limbaugh for Spewing 'Irresponsible' Vitriol (ABC News, January 10, 2011)

Vitriol focus of lawmakers after Arizona shooting of Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (LA Times, January 10, 2011)
The New Vitriol-Free Cable News Network (Huffington Post, January 10, 2011)
Vitriol first, and now the bloodshed:Gunfire that wounds a member of Congress and kills six people punctuates a poisoning of the nation's political discourse (BuffaloNews.com, January 10, 2011)
Did 'Vitriol' on Airwaves Trigger Arizona Attack? (Fox News, January 9, 2011)

Isn't Vitriol the Same as Passionate Debate?
Not really. It is a step over the line of decorum. It is a personal attack style, it reviles, vilifies, insults, snipes and assaults. It goes beyond passion to become mean-spirited, and as such reduces the value of the argument when value is present at all.

Why Am I Writing about This? So What?
The word just caught my eye - the numerous uses of it and it seems to be widely recognized and perhaps agreed upon that it's becoming common in political rhetoric (or sloganeering as they seem to be doing more of)and that perhaps a more civil discussion has gone the way of what was considered at one time to be a skill that intelligent people used to debate the issues.

This civil discourse has seemed to have left the halls of business, the arenas of sports and definitely the multi-channeled venue for entertainment. We as consumers of vitriol have become complacent and numb to it as it moves into more areas of our lives, spreading insidiously and intertwining itself upon us until we don't recognize it any longer - it is common place.

In addition, as a media psychology doctoral student I am looking at the overall picture of the potential for a cause and effect relationship between vitriol as viewed and or listened to via a media channel and a violent act by a consumer of that vitriol.




A Violent Past
Vitriol and violence (I'm not using this in a cause and effect way)are unfortunately nothing new in American politics. Worthy of remembering and mentioning here are some instances that happened in our past.

In 1856, Senator Charles Sumner gave a speech criticizing pro-slavery southerners. Three days later, he was beaten badly on the Senate floor by U.S. Rep. Preston Brooks of South Carolina. He didn’t return to the Senate for three years ("Art & History Home Historical Minutes 1851-1877 The Caning of Senator Charles Sumner," n.d.).

In the 1950s, communist hunter Senator Joseph McCarthy ruined many lives in his quest to "expose" communists in the United States (Miller, 2006).

In 1963, anti-United Nations protesters struck U.N. Ambassador Adlai Stevenson on the head and spit on him in Dallas (a month before Kennedy visited)("Texas: A City Disgraced - TIME," 1963).

When Kennedy arrived in Dallas, handbills were already printed and being circulated with a picture of the President and a caption "Wanted for Treason" (The Warren Commission report: report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy., 1992). And of course the assassination of JFK occurred shortly after.

There is a long list of Presidents who have been assassinated and had attempts made on their lives and if you are interested, you can always visit Wikipedia or this site>.

Media Violence and Violent Behavior
The question often arises if media violence causes violent behavior or those who have demonstrated aggressive behavior tend to consume violent media. Several studies have been conducted in an attempt to answer this question. In a study by Paik and Comstock, aggregated meta-data was used to look at viewing-to-behavior and behavior-to-viewing effects as well as socio-economic statuses (SES) among the test subjects. The results showed that viewing-to-behavior was more likely to cause aggression than behavior-to-viewing (Comstock, 2008). So yes, media violence does cause aggressive behavior in certain consumers and one could possibly include vitriol as media violence. But why does it cause aggressive behavior in only certain consumers, why not all violent media consumers?

To partially answer this, according to Comstock (2008) there are five attributes of a consumer that makes him or her more at risk from the effects of media violence:
1. A predisposition for anti-social or aggressive behavior: surveys (Belson, 1978; Robinson & Bachman, 1972), experiments (Celozzi, Kazelskis, & Gutsch, 1981; Josephson, 1987), meta-analysis (Paik, 1991).
2. Rigid or indifferent parenting; unsatisfactory social relationships: (Chaffee, McLeod, & Atkin, 1971; McLeod et al., 1972b).
3.Low psychological well-being: (D. R. Anderson, Collins, Schmitt, & Jacobvitz, 1996; Canary & Spitzberg, 1993; Comstock & Scharrer, 1999; Kubey & Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Maccoby, 1954; Potts & Sanchez, 1994).
4. Having been diagnosed or suffering from disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs): (Grimes, Bergen, Nichols, Vernberg, & Fonagy, 2004).

Comstock goes on to say that violent media consumers with a predisposition for anti-social or aggressive behavior are at the greatest risk.

The Persuasive Effect of Media
Finally, in an attempt to analyze this topic quickly, media is a big player when it comes to persuasion. When we view a movie or television program, we inject ourselves into it, it becomes real, we no longer realize we are watching fiction, a talk show, the news, (or a reenactment of an actual event). Why do we do this? “The mass media artfully, skillfully, and adeptly use knowledge of human psychology to get our attention, and yes, even when we don’t necessarily ‘want’ to give it.” (Dill, 2008, p. 24).

References

Art & History Home Historical Minutes 1851-1877 The Caning of Senator Charles Sumner. (n.d.). U.S. Senate. Retrieved January 22, 2011, from http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/The_Caning_of_Senator_Charles_Sumner.htm
Art & History Home Historical Minutes 1941-1963 "Communists in Government Service," McCarthy Says. (n.d.). U.S. Senate. Retrieved January 22, 2011, from http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Communists_In_Government_Service.htm
Comstock, G. (2008). A Soci0logical Perspective On Television Violence and Aggression. American Behavioral Scientist, 51(8), 1184-1211.


Comstock, G., & Scharrer, E. (1999). Television: What’s on, who’s watching, and what it

means. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Dill, K.E. (2009). How fantasy becomes reality: Seeing through media influences.
New York: Oxford University Press

Miller, A. (2006, August 23). Arthur Miller - McCarthyism American Masters. PBS: Public Broadcasting Service. Retrieved January 22, 2011, from http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/arthur-miller/mccarthyism/484/

Texas: A City Disgraced - TIME. (1963, November 1). Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com. Retrieved January 22, 2011, from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,875296,00.html

Images


http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/wantedfortreason.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/7891088/Obama-Hitler-billboard-removed.html

The User Interface – You’ve Come a Long Way Baby

The User Interface – You’ve Come a Long Way Baby

My final paper in PSY 769 (Psychology and Website Design) was about semiotics and the Graphical user interface (GUI). While writing this paper I started thinking about how the user interface had changed over the years and at what point did icon-laden interfaces come to light and why. I had to struggle with the DOS era - learning the language of the Command Line interface (CLI), so I have a high regard for the progress of the user interface. With that said, I thought it would be interesting to see how far the user interface has come over the years.

1960s
Early discussions involving the computer and humans was highlighted by D.C. Engelbart (1962):
"This is an initial summary report of a project taking a new and systematic approach to improving the intellectual effectiveness of the individual human being. A detailed conceptual framework explores the nature of the system composed of the individual and the tools, concepts, and methods that match his basic capabilities to his problems. One of the tools that shows the greatest immediate promise is the computer, when it can be harnessed for direct on-line assistance, integrated with new concepts and methods." (p. 1).

In 1968 Engelbart and his team demonstrated the “personal computer” that they designed and developed. It was called the oN-Line System and included a vector graphics display system, typewriter keyboard, a five key chording keyboard and a rudimentary mouse.







1970s
In 1970 Xerox developed the Alto. Its working components fit in a tower that fit under the desk. Its most striking feature was its display, which was the same size and orientation as a printed page, and featured full raster-based, bitmapped graphics at a resolution of 606 by 808. It also had a keyboard and an updated version of Engelbart’s mouse. For the first time, the mouse pointer resembled an arrow.




In 1974 Xerox developed the first “modern” GUI. It was called Smalltalk and was designed to be the interface of the Smalltalk programming language (first object-oriented) and development environment. Note the icons for the mailbox and clock.



Apple designed an early version of the Lisa interface in 1979. Note on the following mockup, the early menu area and how limited it was. The Lisa did provide hotkeys for frequent tasks and also provided an indication of completed tasks by placing a “check mark” next to the task. But from the options provided on the interface, it seemed that the design was limited by what users could actually do on the computer.




1980s
The final version of the Lisa, released in 1983. Note the recognizable icons of folders, trash can, calculator, however the Tool icon is a folder like the folders icon.


The makers of the first spreadsheet application VisiCorp released VisiOn in 1983 with a user interface that contained no icons and reverted the mouse pointer back to the pre-arrow days of Engelbart.



The Tandy Deskmate was released in 1984. It was designed to be primarily used with the keyboard using function keys as shortcuts for menus.



Windows 1.0 was released in 1985. Its interface came with scrollbars, color and tiled windows.



Commodore’s Amiga was released in 1985. Its GUI was called Workbench. The windows could be moved and there was also a fixed menu at the top of the interface that remained hidden unless activated with the right mouse button. Note the amount of icon usage. Some of the icons resemble desk drawers.



Berkeley Software released the Geos in 1986. The rudimentary icons for printer, desktop, color manager, paint and trash are interesting. A step forward compared to some of the previous interfaces. These also indicate that more tasks are available for the user at this point.



Windows 2.0 was released in 1987. Note the overlapping windows. The maximize and minimize icons are arrows and there are scrollbars.



Acorn Computers, a UK-based company released their interface called Arthur. This interface contained the first “dock” concept where icons of programs and tasks could be launched. Also note that the icons for maximize and close are closer to those of today.



In 1988 Steve Jobs released NeXTSTEP, the new GUI and operating system for his NeXT computer. Note the almost exclusive use of icons in the Workspace/File area. Also note the menus for workspace, files and tools are separate. Is that a “reload” or “redo/undo” icon at the bottom of the dock area located on the right side of the screen? By the way, the dock could be moved to any side of the interface. There is an icon with an image of a house but it is labeled “Me” so I’m not sure what that is for.



1990s
Windows 3 was released in 1990 and came with better looking imagery for the icons. Note that accessories and games are available.



Windows 95 was released in 1995. The icon for the control panel now featured images of tools. This computer could be on a network (dial-up networking) as indicated by the icon of connected computers. Trash has been renamed “recycle bin” which is more environmentally friendly.




Mac’s OS X 10.0 shows many familiar icons. Note the heart and house. Also, the familiar maximize, minimize and close icons are present.



2010
With the advent of content management systems, a user friendly GUI was necessary to allow non-programmers/developers to develop websites and their content. The following image is the content editor in Drupal used by media psychology doctoral students in a psychology of web design class. The entire site was conceived, designed and developed by these students who for the most part are not developers. Notice the use of icons in the menu now compared to those in the previous decades. An interesting thing to note is that these icons are second nature to most users now. An image icon, a video icon and text icons are examples of readily recognizable icons by users.



What Caused the Progression from CLI to the Icon Heavy GUI?
Many things have contributed to the progress including the progress of the technology itself. But I offer that it was the human experience that caused the changes. That initially, the interfaces were designed to accommodate a very narrow group of users who had access to computers – scientists and engineers. The developers were the designers. As the computer became more accessible to the public, more uses were required and the complex language used to operate computers needed to be replaced with recognizable signs from the physical, known world of humans.

Nadin (1990) suggests that despite the diversity in structure and purpose, signs are intermediaries between two or more distinct entities brought together through a specialized human activity called design. He goes on to offer a generalized concept of design as interface:
"The product of design is the reality through which user and designer communicate. I should repeat that interface, no matter what kind, specifies the optimal set of signs for the interaction between two entities, be they animate or inanimate. In a limited sense, user interface specifies the action the user is supposed to take in order to access different parts of a system to the design of the conceptual model that is the basis of that particular system." (p. 427).
Interface design is coding and replacing complex language instructions with signs. In the case of the GUI, the design is coding with signs (icon, index, symbol and metaphor) which replace the complex language of DOS as well as the limited interaction offered by a CLI for the user.

Brosnan (1988) wrote that about one-third of the human population was afraid of technology (at the time of his writing) and it was the computer that mostly contributed to it. Part of that fear was the unfamiliarity of the language required to operate computers. To facilitate adoption and diffusion of innovations, the innovation and the user’s needs should be scrutinized.
An interesting perspective that fits this statement is offered by J. H. Carr Jr. (n.d.):
"Successful adoption/diffusion is the assumed result of an innovation's technological superiority. The innovation's developer is viewed as the primary change agent. For instrumentalists the process is evolutionary, and the causes of change are in social conditions and in human aspirations for change and improvement. Thus their focus is on the user (adopter) of a technology and its value as a tool to bring about desired change. Human control over the innovation is a key issue, and it is considered essential to understand the social context in which it will be used and the function that it will serve." (Adoption/Diffusion Theories section, para. 8).
The change from a CLI to the GUI is that human control over the innovation that contributed to reducing the initial resistance and fear of using the computer (Brosnan 1998). Humanity integrated with technology at the very basic level of our understanding of the world around us using a system of signs.
 
References

Brosnan, M. J. (1998). Technophobia the psychological impact of information technology. New York: Routledge. Retrieved November 11, 2010, from Questia.

Carr Jr., V. H. (n.d.). Technology Adoption and Diffusion. This site has been updated. Retrieved August 04, 2010, from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/innovation/adoptiondiffusion.htm

Engelbart, D. C. (1962). AUGMENTING HUMAN INTELLECT: A Conceptual Framework (Rep.). Menlo Park, CA: Stanford Research Institute. Retrieved December 12, 2010, from Http://www.invisiblerevolution.net/engelbart/full_62_paper_augm_hum_int.html.

Nadin, M. (1990). Design and Semiotics. Semiotics in the Individual Sciences, II, 418-436.

Images:
About Media Psychology. (2010, October 25). Media Psychology Now. Retrieved December 12, 2010, from http://mediapsychnow.com

Reimer, J. (2005, May 5). A History of the GUI. Ars Technica. Retrieved December 12, 2010, from http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2005/05/gui.ars/

Subbacultcha: The Most Awesome Thing Ever...even more Awesomer

Subbacultcha: The Most Awesome Thing Ever...even more Awesomer

Technology and the Aging Population

Boomers

I was thinking who the aging population to be designed to really is and some of my research indicates that the baby boomer generation is the target. This generation has experienced more diverse technology throughout their lives than any previous generation which helps with the adoption of new technologies. They have seen, throughout their lifetime a rapid technological change which makes them keen on and open to new innovations. Never before have people worked, learned and played longer with our ever increasing lifespan. I looked into a research group at MIT called the “AgeLab.”

AgeLab
The AgeLab at MIT was created in 1999 to “invent new ideas and creatively translate technologies into practical solutions that improve people’s health and enable them to ‘do things’ throughout the lifespan. AgeLab has assembled a multi-disciplinary team of researchers, business partners, universities, and the aging community to design, develop and deploy innovations that touch nearly all aspects of how we will live, work and play tomorrow ("About AgeLab MIT AgeLab," 2010).”




What we know about the baby boomer generation may quite possibly indicate that they are the buyers (if not lead adopters) of the most high-tech, high-priced, and high-design (Coughlin 2007). However, a generation is not a homogenous group of people so should not be designed to as having a perceived need of a technological experience. Rather knowledge of an unfulfilled need should be discovered. But this is too simple of a concept. There should be a group of needs that are relative to a generation that allow quality aging.

Quality Aging Needs
The AgeLab took Maslow’s Needs Hierarchy (1943) diagram and substituted Maslow’s needs with “Quality Aging” needs and added innovation areas with them (Coughlin & Lau 2005):

Contribution – Education, workplace technologies; cognitive enhancement
Connectivity – Communication, entertainment, leisure, transportation alternatives, livable communities
Safety – Smart housing, personal emergency response, systems: robotics, ubiquitous computing
Health – Telemedicine: wearable computing, Point of decision aids; disease management and behavior systems

Five Lessons for Innovating/Designing for Quality Aging
When looking at the list of innovation areas, there are so many technological devices opportunities that require user interfaces. According to Coughlin, there are five valuable lessons when innovating/designing technology for quality aging:

Lesson 1 – Build it, they will come…maybe
User acknowledgement of an unfulfilled need is the first step to adopting a new technology. However, older adults are prone to user denial, particularly with regard to assistive technologies to support disease and disability. In such cases it is not apparent to an older person that he or she has reached the point at which they need a device to perform the functions that they have conducted all their lives without assistance.

Lesson 2 – User-centered Design may best be defined by the User
Ironically, the growth of new disruptive technologies is only rivaled by the growth of disruptive demographics in an aging marketplace. These two forces collide and are reconciled by designers on the interface of every new device.

Lesson 3 – Designing Value – It may be Usable, but is it Useful?
Even if older people can easily use a technology, they must value its functionality before adopting it fully. Research suggests that older users assess whether a new technology clearly provides greater value than the existing means they use to satisfy a given need. If the value is not appreciably greater than the existing means, then the likelihood of spending the time to learn how to use, let alone adopt, the technology is very low (Davis, et al., 1989; Adams, et al.,1992).

Lesson 4 – Designing Trust
Purchasing a product is only a beginning. Use and adoption requires trust. Engineering trust into new technology is receiving increasing attention from developers of both devices and services for older consumers. Trust can be best thought of as predictability and reliability. Research suggests that younger adults are more likely to ‘trust’ the promise and effectiveness of technology, even in the absence of user experience with the product, than older users who have performed similar functions without the aid of automation (Cotte, et al., 2001).

Lesson 5– Good Design. It’s all in your head
Product development and launch was easier when the consumer was young enough to see everything as new and novel. While admittedly fast moving and hard to keep, the ‘tween through twenty-something’ market is a relative tabla rasa when introducing new technology and design. Easier does not mean profitable in a market where their numbers are not as great as their parents’ – moreover, they purchase the more affordable products where margins are thinner.

In contrast, the boomers are now all grown up and have grown up tastes – representing both the fastest growing and most lucrative market that purchases the most profitable products. Unlike their children, older consumers have history, experience, and a general understanding to judge and guide their use of new products.


References
About AgeLab MIT AgeLab. (2010). Home MIT AgeLab. Retrieved November 13, 2010, from http://agelab.mit.edu/about-agelab

Cotte, N., Meyer, J., & Coughlin, J. (2001). Older and younger drivers' reliance on collision warning systems. Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Human Factor Society, 277-280.

Coughlin, J. F., & Lau, J. (2005). Cathedral Builders Wanted: Constructing a New Vision of Technology for Old Age. Public Policy and Aging, 16(1), 4-8.

Coughlin, J. H. (2007). Speaking Silver: Lessons for Product Innovation & Development in an aging market. Retrieved November 13, 2010, from http://www.myriadweb.com/AgeLab/downloads/collateral/reporttemplate1.pdf

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology:A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1003.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A. H. Maslow (1943) A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychology Review, 50, 370-396. Retrieved November 13, 2010, from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm

Image:http://www.internetmarketinginc.com/blog/baby-boomers-are-back/

Image:http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/petros753/ancient-laptop.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/53043/&usg=___G3zCgl3myEBNcmzm6pxO2Xf3Kw=&h=800&w=600&sz=64&hl=en&start=15&zoom=1&tbnid=-W4M27IU2EWe5M:&tbnh=159&tbnw=119&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dold%2Blaptop%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1192%26bih%3D504%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:10%2C390&itbs=1&ei=yXrhTNv8EJztnQeD0uSgDw&biw=1192&bih=504&iact=rc&dur=250&oei=wHrhTK6vEIG78gavqbiMDw&esq=2&page=2&ndsp=10&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:15&tx=54&ty=82

Danger, Sex and Food

I thought that would get your attention. But have you ever asked yourself why those topics seem to stop people in their tracks? I just read a book called Neuro Web Design by Susan Weinschenk that helps explain this and the plethera of media products using these three simple topics.

It seems that we have an old brain, mid brain and a new brain.

• The old brain is pretty much fixated on our survival.


• The mid brain processes our emotions.


• The new brain likes to think things over, read, play music, apply logic.

Old and Mid Brains Rule

The old and mid brains' processing occurs without us knowing that it's happening and they affect us more than our new brain. Most of the decision making and behavior is governed by this unconscious processing. "So what?" you ask. The implication is that we cannot separate our conscious acts from the unconscious - thus a marketing opportunity.

As marketers, all we need to do to get someone's unconscious attention is to use the following triggers:

• Do or show something threatening


• Show a change in the environment/landscape


• Show food


• Imply sex

Think about what you see on commercials. They might have one or all of the triggers thus gaining our old brain's attention without us realizing it. We are on heightened alert, a great time for the marketer to zap us with their message. Top television shows and movies have at least one of the topics. The most popular stories on cnn.com NewsPulse confirm this:

There is a change in the Cowboy's environment, food (Twinkies) is mentioned, and the last two stories are about danger and death. Although this is certainly not a scientific method of analyzing this, it was interesting to see the top stories (most popular) on cnn.com somewhat confirms this post. Why they are popular on cnn.com is another story. Could be placement on the page, etc.

The Old Brain and the Web

Because the old brain is all about "you", an online experience should be designed to speak to "you" with language that gets the old brain's attention. That's why using the words "you" on a website are so impactful. The old brain constantly scans for changes in the environment. That is why movement in ads on the web gets our attention, or images that cycle through. Of course, one needs to be concious of the audience of the site, too much movement creates an unpleasant user experience for some users.

So, if you want to get someone's attention, just use one or all of the triggers or cater to the "you" in all of us. We are simple creatures after all.

References

Weinschenk, S. (2009). Neuro web design what makes them click? Berkely, CA: New riders

Images:
cnn.com
http://www.toonpool.com/cartoons/teenage%20caveman_9475

Stereotypes and the Media

Where Does Stereotyping Come From?
Just what perpetuates gender stereotyping in our culture? I can't imagine...oh wait, maybe this ad??? Although the copy clearly is gender neutral "a fun way to teach a child the importance of cleaning.." the ad shows a little girl happily using the ten piece cleaning trolley. She is even wearing an apron. Now imagine a little boy in her place in this ad.

Perpetuating Bad Decisions
And there is yet another horrific thing that this ad is doing. There are some people in the population that think if a little girl is so happy getting this cleaning device as a present, imagine what pleasure grown-up women will have in receiving vacuum cleaners and other household appliances for important occassions such as birthdays, Xmas and especially wedding anniversaries.

Ahmadinejad, Lohan and a Doctor's Waiting Room

I spent about three hours in a doctors' surgery clinic yesterday waiting for my Mom. I took one of my textbooks that I'm reading for a class called Social Bases of Behavior. The waiting room was pretty full but fairly quiet except for the television that was tuned in to Fox News. I tried to tune it out but they kept promoting an interview that one of their reporters had with Ahmadinejad after his speech at the UN the day prior. Once the interview came on, I put my book down and watched it. I also looked around the waiting room and people were still engrossed in their books, magazines and cell phones with not one person watching the interview. The interview was somewhat interesting and after it was over I went back to my book.



A while later coverage began on Lindsey Lohan entering the courthouse and people all around the room dropped what they were doing and watched intently as the video rolled. Afterward there was a slight buzz of discussion among the people in the waiting room. I wish I could say I was surprised at the reaction but I was not. Yet I found the situation compelling enough to write about it.

What is it with celebrity? Or is it watching someone's downfall that is self-enhancing, somehow making us feel better about ourselves? I thought the situation tied in neatly with this current class on what makes us (as humans) do the things we do. Clearly in terms of who could do the most damage to the U.S. and our lives as we know them is Ahmadinejad who could be the one world leader (in my lifetime) that decides to use nuclear weapons to incite WW III. He certainly is heads and shoulders above Lindsey Lohan on the "world destruction list" of characters. However, she (and those like her - Paris Hilton et al.) could be an insidious destructive force for evil in the way that they have infiltrated our lives and have somehow become the focal point of our concern thereby distracting us while others go about their potentially destructive and deadly business.

I would hope to think that what I observed in the waiting room is not representative of our society but as I surveyed the room it seemed like a good representative with various ages, genders and races. Perhaps the coverage on Ahmadinejad was considered news and the coverage on Lohan was considered entertainment and therefore grabbed the attention of the people in the waiting room?

Hopefully in the coming weeks, I will learn more about this phenonmenon and follow up with an additional post of my findings.

References

[Digital image]. (n.d.). Retrieved September 25, 2010, from http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://cdn.smosh.com/smosh-pit/072010/lilo-8.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.smosh.com/smosh-pit/articles/lindsay-lohan-finally-goes-jail&usg

[Digital image]. (n.d.). Retrieved September 25, 2010, from http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.zimtelegraph.com/wp-content/uploads/IRAN-PRESIDENT1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.zimtelegraph.com/%3Fp%3D6864&usg