samples, samples everywhere

Sampling in music is a curious phenomenon. The term “sampling” describes using another piece of music - usually just a snippet - in one’s song; it’s used for a variety of reasons, including as a pop reference to another popular work or simply because it’s a good musical idea that warranted expansion and/or revising.

Sampling is most notable in hip-hop music, where pioneers in the 90’s began using cutting bits of popular songs and choruses to serve as hooks for a rap. Jay-Z, for example, was noted - and acclaimed - for much of his sampling work, including the 1998 “Hard Knock Life (Ghetto Anthem),” which took the hook from the Broadway musical Annie.

But sampling also brings up a bevy of ethical questions about how and why one uses other pieces of music in a supposedly original work.

A recent single released by Miami-area rapper Flo Rida, for instance, features a prominent sample from electronic dance music artist Tim Bergling, more commonly known as Avicii. “Levels,” the Bergling song in question, was an undeniable hit over the summer, not only with EDM fans but with the greater mainstream music scene. “Levels” played - and still plays - everywhere, and became an emblem for growing mainstream acceptance of EDM genres of music.

Flo Rida’s “Good Feeling” is a strong track on its own, but as a huge supporter of EDM, I can’t help but feel that it smacks of piggybacking. It’s been a while since Flo Rida has a legitimate superstar hit on the radio charts - his David Guetta collaboration “Club Can’t Handle Me” was arguably his last big track - and to come back with a lead single that very heavily samples “Levels”? This isn’t a throwback Broadway sample we’re talking about.

Where do we draw the line between ingenuity and originality? Clearly, it was a brilliant move from a support standpoint to sample “Levels”; it’s an intensely popular track that many listeners would recognize, and does mate well with Flo Rida’s bombastic Miami-swag-party style of hip-hop. But how much of it was motivated by genuine artistry, as opposed to inspiration from a moneymaking standpoint?

Using an obvious sample, as Flo Rida does, is one issue. Another, though, is much more low-key - using largely unrecognizable tracks as the source material, for instance. This is something that Kanye West does brilliantly, but it also brings up questions of musical ethics.

After all, what’s worse - blatantly “ripping off” a popular track, or using so much sampled material - much of it difficult to identify upon listening - that it’s hard to identify whose musical idea a song features? Upon first thought, it seems to be the former. But I’d be willing to say that the latter can be more insidious, as most people will believe the music to be solely of the artist, such as Kanye West himself.

Going forward, artists are going to have to struggle with how to protect their integrity while using others’ musical ideas. It’s clear that sampling is an accepted, and often ingenious, technique in songwriting. But a fine line does exist, and we need to question intent behind such decisions.

a very bieber christmas - an album review.

Justin Bieber’s new album Under the Mistletoe is an interesting proposition. It’s curious that he’s decided to release a holiday-themed record as his second full-length work. And it’s even stranger that, for a Christmas album, the traditional songs aren’t particularly great.

Take his version of the classic “Santa Claus is Coming to Town,” for instance. It sounds stylistically and musically like an odd and unremarkable caricature of the Jackson 5’s “I Want You Back” and features background singers pitch-corrected into saccharine submission.

When Bieber sings Shake it, shake it baby, over and over in the bridge, it doesn’t feel fun; rather, it comes off as cliché.

And why include a note-for-note rendition of Mariah Carey’s 1994 chart-smashing “All I Want for Christmas Is You”? It’s an inoffensive duet cover from Carey and Bieber, but the inclusion seems vaguely lazy, as if the pair just couldn’t think of a new song to tackle.

This laziness isn’t confined to just that track. Though there might be musical creativity in covering traditional holiday songs, Under the Mistletoe often feels like it’s simply going through the motions.

Even some of the originals can be aggravatingly bland. Is the country-crossover tune “Home This Christmas” easy to listen to? Sure. But the song is also mind-numbingly predictable in structure, sounding like a diluted rip-off of Taylor Swift’s lesser works.

And although “Mistletoe” might be the album’s lead single, it’s not much to behold. The distinctive faux-reggae feel of the song, coupled with the chorus ripped straight out of “I’m Yours,” leaves only one logical conclusion: Bieber went back in time and robbed Jason Mraz at gunpoint for his music.

Thankfully, when Bieber chooses to execute his signature, eclectic, R&B-laced, pop sound, it’s a different game.

“Only Thing I Ever Get for Christmas” is a brilliantly melancholy album-opener that shows off Bieber’s newly changed voice, now huskier and darker. And “Christmas Eve,” co-written by Chris Brown, is a seductively brooding slow jam that proves Bieber is an R&B force to be reckoned with.

Of course, how could we forget the surreal “Drummer Boy”? It’s an unpredictable jaw-dropper, if only because of the return of “Shawty Mane,” Bieber’s so-called rapping alter-ego.

It’s weird if you haven’t heard him rap before, and some lines, like It’s crazy how some people say they don’t care / When there’s people on the street with no food, it’s not fair, are more than a little ham-fisted, but the sheer ridiculousness of the track works, especially when Busta Rhymes jumps in with his fluid, machine-gun flow.

Paradoxically, although big-time collaborations with artists such as Usher and Boyz II Men help strengthen Under the Mistletoe’s tracks, they also undermine Bieber’s independence as an artist. Sometimes it feels as if a guest was brought in to prop-up an otherwise unremarkable song.

Inexperience and a lack of vision also shows in the haphazard album, which stumbles from Christmas carol to country tune to acoustic pop and so on. The instrumentation suffers from it too; though the production is slick, the backing tracks often sound generic and unfocused.

Under the Mistletoe proves that what Bieber needs most is to find his own direction — not the record company’s, nor the producers,’ but something that’s his and only his. There are flashes of brilliance here and there, and it’s clear Bieber is a superstar who’s here to stay, but his immaturity as an artist is a puzzle he hasn’t quite cracked.

As a sophomore, full-length album, Under the Mistletoe is the equivalent of the color beige: It’s hard to be really compelled by it. There’s simply not enough of the memorable music that shot Bieber into the pop-culture stratosphere in the first place, although those already infected with Bieber fever will argue otherwise.

occupy the news: a movement and its portrayal

To say that the Occupy movement is polarizing would be a massive understatement.

Ask people on the street about it and you’ll get plenty of extreme opinions. Some will champion it as a movement on par with the civil rights activity of the 60s. Others will lambast it as dissent of the lazy and uninformed.

The latter belief is particularly noteworthy today. In general, broad social movements tend to get the sympathy of the American public. But the Boston Globe published a poll recently that shows that only 29 percent of Americans support the Occupy movement.

Why? The biggest issue seems to be whether or not people can relate. Agreeing that the nation’s economy and government are broken is one thing; buying into the unspecific, angry, often hippie-esque spirit of Occupy is another thing altogether.

Part of this, of course, has to do with how the movement has been portrayed. Mainstream media outlets have ostensibly (hopefully?) tried their best to portray the movement in an objective light. The problem? It’s just too easy to fail at this goal.

It’s easy for disdainful anchors to make slights about the movement. It’s easy to explain the movement in an unflattering light. And, of course, there is the issue of soundbites (i.e. on-air interviews).

How does one, as a reporter, discern between people who will give clear, informed answers and those who have no idea what the hell’s going on? Answer: you can’t. And so we end up with what I’ve dubbed the ineloquent-but-mad Occupy protester: that person who, when they’re asked why they are protesting, answers with bullshit about the rich and the heroism of the underdog.

Ineloquent-but-mad Occupy protesters are part of the reality that is the Occupy movement, sure. But local news outlets, pressured by the stresses of live broadcasts, don’t have a vetting process when it comes to talking to strangers. This brings to light a couple of quibbles: does the inability to find legitimate, diverse beliefs misrepresent the movement to an impressionable American public? And why not look to true leaders - like noted professor and activist Cornel West, who was present at Occupy Wall Street - to properly contextualize what’s going on?

Conservatives frequently complain that mainstream news has a hard, liberal slant. While this can be debated all night (and day) long, one thing that everyone can probably agree on is that the news is undoubtedly very prone to inadvertent bias. News outlets have failed to show all angles of the Occupy movement, and for that, the movement - and the public - has been slighted.

gotye and cold nights: the intersection of music, emotion and learning

I remember speeding through a hazy, wet October night on my burnt-orange P.O.S. bike, listening to Australian indie gem Gotye belt his laments.

“But you didn’t have to cut me off,” he sang. “Now you’re just somebody that I used to know.”

And amid the fog and the sting of the wind and the uncomfortably numbing night chill and the lonesome fluorescent-orange glow of the street lamps, I felt a little, well, sad.

Why? Probably because the lyrics struck a strange chord with regards to a romance from way back when, and made me think about a time in which being sad was kind of a regular thing.

Music’s effect on the human mind is a fascinating thing indeed. I remember listening to music - all sorts, all genres - from a very young age, and always wondered whether or not a lifetime of music consumption ever did anything to me. I figure it has to - these songs hold messages, and emotions, and repeated exposure to these messages and emotions must do something. Right?

In American psychologist Howard Cutler’s book The Art of Happiness, the Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso points out that our notions of love and romance are highly subjective, largely dependent on environment and culture.

“Don’t you ever get lonely, without someone to yourself?” Cutler asks in one lazy afternoon meeting over tea.

“Why? I have everyone I meet, and everyone who is a friend,” answers the Dalai Lama with a laugh.

So maybe we get our obsession with soulmates from culture. Music is a cultural product, and one that works in a cyclical fashion: artists express certain ideas, these ideas are propagated into society through song, which then inspires other artists. It makes sense that we’re learning to live to a literal soundtrack of messages.

“Somebody That I Used to Know” makes me reflect on my life, whether I like it or not. It encourages a sustained belief in the sadness of distance. Even the melody - something that conveys and inspires emotion through just musical form - inspires sadness through its minor tonality, playing as background music to all those thoughts running through my head.

I finally got home on my creaking bike, the last few bars of the song wrapping up the trip. It was three minutes of random daydreaming, maybe some life analysis thrown in for good measure. And though it was just another small musical moment, I couldn’t help but think that it was changing me for good.

Facebook Timeline - Relive the past (and all your ex-girlfriends)

If you haven’t heard by now, Facebook is currently rolling out dramatic changes to users’ profiles.

Cue the groans and wailing.

Jokes aside, this new development features one particularly noteworthy element: Timeline.

Timeline essentially replaces the old standby, the Wall, to make it more crisp, chronological and inclusive. Instead of separating and categorizing changes and prioritizing “Wall posts”, all elements are laid out as they chronologically occur along a thin grey line that stretches down the center of the page - the “Timeline”, if you will.

Facebook developers had first access to it, but regular users were able to get Timeline by exploiting the Facebook Developer app, normally used to create legitimate applications for the platform. By mindlessly clicking through a couple pages, you can become a “developer” as well (even if your app literally does nothing).

That’s what I did, although I’m not sure why - only others with Timeline can see the changes on your profile.

Regardless, it’s a big, bold move by Zuckerberg and Co. Overall? I like it - it’s more visual, more intuitive, and comes off looking more like a cool blog than just a Facebook page.

One specific feature of this change, though, stuck out to me. It’s a series of links on the side of the page, near the top - a sequence of years, starting from when your profile was “born”.

Basically, you can see everything that you’ve done on Facebook since you first began tentatively posting, way back when.

It makes sense, because Mark Zuckerberg declared in a live keynote speech (doing his best Steve Jobs impersonation) that Timeline would show “the story of your life.”

That sounds good and all, but here’s the kicker: is this something we really need?

Here’s the thing: the story of my life, documented online? It’s checkered. There are ridiculous, sophomoric (literal and figurative) moments involved. There are my awkward and “subtle” attempts to woo over select females. And, of course, there are my ex-girlfriends.

Clicking through the so-called story of my life, I found myself reliving, re-investigating these moments of the past.

I’m not sure I liked it.

Maybe it’s just a “look to the future” mentality I have, but the ability to see my life history isn’t necessarily something I want.

More importantly, I’m not sure I want OTHERS to have the ability to see my life history.

Facebook stalking, as it’s referred to, feels like it's already at an all-time high. Creeping on peoples’ Walls, looking through their pictures, examining - and then over-examining - every detail, assumption, inference: it’s a phenomenon, and one that’s extremely difficult to resist in this age of inter-connectivity.

Psychology blogger Seth Meyers points out this destructive cycle, referring to it as "unhealthy":

The worst of the Facebook OCD I see (and keep in mind that I use the term "OCD" here to compare it to a well known psychological disorder, not to suggest that this is a mental-health disorder on the same level as professionally diagnosed OCD) happens when men and women in romantic relationships end those relationships.

People look into their targets' Facebook accounts once they've been cut out of their target's friendship circle, trying to glean more information about what he or she is doing now. This behavior, the Facebook obsessor realizes at some point, becomes a problem. Checking Facebook to see what an ex is doing becomes a drug. People start swearing off Facebook, determined to close their accounts and somehow make it impossible to check their obsessee's page again.

But again, it goes both ways. Could being able to relive the past - via Facebook, but still - become a crutch for those feeling down, feeling lonely, feeling lost in the present?

It seems possible. And Amy Muise, from the Cyber-Psychology Department at the University of Guelph (Ontario), even noted in a study that couples who both used Facebook tended to hold more jealous emotions. Clearly, there is a potential for Facebook to harbor negativity in an insidious way.

Add in a dose of everything you've ever done on Facebook, available at your fingertips? Hm.

"Lifelogging" is a relatively new phenomenon, and it involves documenting the "life" of, well, just about anything - Mini USA, for instance, experimented with a vehicle system that could intelligently log the driver's actions and activities from the day of purchase, eventually providing suggestions and "surprise" activities via GPS.

Facebook's own form of lifelogging is a little different, of course - it hardly features anything as useful as your own car surprising you with new things to do.

And isn't Facebook more about the present, about interaction, about networking and the immediate flow of information from person to person? Social media in general live and die by progression, and it's a curious decision for Zuckerberg to push Facebook now as a way to memorialize your life instead of push it ahead.

In any case, Timeline proves to be an intriguing - and possibly emotionally confusing - addition to the world of social media. What people tend to forget, it seems, is that Facebook can be the perfect hub of all of our joy - but all of our faults and failures as well.

Which will we end up perusing late at night?

Trio

Intro:

“What came first, the music or the misery?”

So asks Rob Fleming, the lead character of Nick Hornby’s immensely popular novel High Fidelity. He is in a contemplative mood, perusing his vast record collection in a post-breakup slump.

It’s a simple enough question, but pretty big when you take the second to contemplate it. After all, we imagine that our thoughts and actions are ours and ours only - conscious, independent, controlled. But while this may be partly true, the importance of environment probably shouldn’t be ignored.

The fact is that entertainment media is all around us, swirling in a dynamic and influential hurricane that hits us every day. So what if I hadn’t listened to pop music my entire life? Would I hold the same feelings about love, about relationships and anger and life in general? What if I hadn’t read The Catcher in the Rye? Does Jersey Shore make me stupider? Does listening to shock-rap like old-school Eminem and Odd Future make me more violent?

What came first, the media, or everything I know?

Let’s be honest, though: there aren’t going to be very many easy answers to such loaded questions. As a Lifestyle columnist for the Daily Trojan, I tried to wrestle with the issue of culture, controversy and media and how it can shape our mindsets in a column titled Culture Clash. It was a bit tough; examining new ideas and events and social phenomenon every week hardly provided a blanket answer for readers (and myself) at the end of the semester.

I’m thinking that the same will be true of this blog. At the very least, my weekly ramblings will help ask some curious questions about the world of media that we live in today.

That might seem pointless, but if I’ve learned anything from studying and practicing the discipline of journalism, it’s that we ought to ask more questions (not in the crazed conspiracy theorist/fervent Tea Party activist way, just in the name of learning). And we’re definitely not asking enough questions about all the shit we consume.

And maybe - just maybe - thinking about the media will help better it. I don’t know about you, but I think that American entertainment might be in a little bit of a slump these days. Thankfully, I haven’t seen My Super Sweet Sixteen on too often lately, but we’re still missing a spark of innovation and critical thinking that maybe existed some time ago. It’s time we changed that.

To get down to the nuts and bolts of it, expect writings on small issues, broad topics and everything in between. Anything from viral videos to a stupid moment on cable news to the fate of the film industry is, in my head, fair game. Think Esquire writer Stephen Marche’s always excellent 1000 Words About Our Culture crossed with New York Magazine’s Vulture blog, but with more collaboration.

Okay, so the writing won’t be that excellent, but still.

I hope that you guys will freely ask questions, both about the crazy stuff I might be saying or about other issues or happenings that you think I should bring up. Blogs are hardly the place to get lectured, anyway. They are - or should be - hubs of communication and discourse. So that’s what we’ll try to do here.

And if you end up not really liking what you’re reading...well, it was worth a shot, right?

Profile:

Apparently, there aren’t too many blogs out there that take pop culture analysis seriously. Oftentimes such a subject is featured in a few posts of someone’s otherwise random or entertainment-related blog. Real analysis - which involves research, deep thought, connecting various ideas across society - is harder to find.

Recently Trendy is a blog that does take pop culture seriously. It bills itself as “analyzing pop culture - one trend at a time” and pretty much delivers on that line - the blog talks about things like the rise of judged talent shows, the growing demand for tablet computers and the significance of Rebecca Black (of “Friday” fame/notoriety) to the music industry.

It’s a pretty fascinating collection of thoughts and conclusions that I tend to agree with, and seem to make sense. At the very least, Recently Trendy’s blog inspires thought and discussion, which is something I’d like to do with my blog.

Interestingly, though, the blog has no named author. Through the “About Me” section and the footnote on the blog, it’s clear that it is one person, and the author also goes ahead to note that he/she is “not an expert” and most definitely “not a spokesperson for pop culture today”.

In other words, they’re likely doing the posts as an independent exercise for themselves as opposed to an extension of their career or expertise. It’s possible that they do work in the entertainment field, but I never get the sense that this is the case; the blog posts themselves don’t reference the author’s own credentials.

Regardless, I end up not caring because the writing is at times pretty impressive - as solid as many so-called pop culture bloggers that work professionally. I think this is an absolutely key observation for myself and every other blogger that’s trying to write in a field where they don’t have established credibility. Consistently good writing can and will garner attention. Anything average will not.

And I think that Recently Trendy does a pretty solid job of fleshing out ideas or statements with convincing analysis and background. More importantly, the blog does so while using a balanced voice - more personal and casual when dealing with the author’s own subjective thoughts, and more academic when establishing objective points.

For me, the latter is particularly well-done - intellectual, without overt dryness, like in this example:

Voting is an interesting concept since it may lead to some unpredictable and even undeserving results. It takes the basic foundation of a talent show and turn the format into a popularity contest instead. Yet, this is not purely a democratic vote, as most competitions allow the public to vote multiple times for their favourite contestants. Thus, a small but devoted fan base can possibly triumph over the more widely popular candidates. In essence, the votes indicate the level of passion from the fans, rather than serve as an accurate measure of talent or popularity. As such, this faulty system is sometimes disputed by the voters, especially when it leads to surprising eliminations.

Best of all - and thank the blogging gods for this - Recently Trendy’s writing doesn’t tumble into the quagmire of hyperbole and awful, Perez-Hilton-like attempts at sarcasm and humor that so many entertainment blogs tend to. Apparently, some bloggers realize content and information trumps vapid “personality”.

The source of the blog is pretty much a mystery. I think this is an notable tactic used by a lot of bloggers that want to be judged purely for their work, as opposed to being recognized by friends/family and the like. While I can’t say for certain that this is what the author of Recently Trendy is going for, I wouldn’t be surprised, either. It does create a bit of a distance from the reader to the author - I do, in a way, wish I knew this person better, to connect easier. But anonymity is a major element of the internet, and I don’t blame the author for remaining behind the shutters.

Voice:

Voice could possibly the most important aspect of mainstream blogging today.

I say this because more often than not, bloggers aim to be persona-driven, with wit-filled prose that brings readers back (and back) for more. The sensational success of bloggers like Perez Hilton has inspired regular folk everywhere to try and do the same. So having a great voice to preach has become critical to having a brand in the blogosphere.

“The Girl From the Ghetto”, as she refers to herself as, has quite a voice - and builds it using a variety of methods. One thing I’ve picked up on in particular, though, is how personal she chooses to be. In fact, her anonymity is in stark contrast to how brutally honest she is about every other aspect of her life - particularly her upbringing.

This is pretty evident in many of her posts, and her willingness to share her backstory and moments from her life helps characterize her more than any fancy “About Me” could (not that she doesn’t have that, too).

“20 Books That Should Be Made Into Movies”, for instance, is a post that at first glance hardly seems to beg for a reflection on her past. Yet she does, and it really works to give the reader a personal connection with her and, by transitive property, her writing!

She begins the post with a look at how - and why - books have made an impact on her life from an early age:

I can remember walking around the complex we lived in (alone, but it was the 1970′s, and again, she was mentally ill and now pregnant and married to an idiot who never wanted me around), bragging to all the other mothers how I could spell and even write my full name in cursive. (Being an Italian, this was no easy task.)

The other mothers would bring out a piece of paper for me to demonstrate, as well as a book to read. Even back then, I was a bit dramatic, but I suppose that comes from being around a mother on an unmedicated manic high most of the time.

See, it’s not just the fact that she talks about her past - anyone can do that. But TGFTG chooses to personalize herself in ways that border the outright ballsy. Who would be brave enough to so brazenly illustrate her clearly choppy childhood? I know I certainly would hesitate.

Most importantly, it helps create weight behind her passion for good (“great”, as she says) reading, which is what propels the rest of the post.

In the more conventional sense of “voice”, however, TGFTG isn’t afraid to use sass and sarcasm to emphasize the points she wants to make.

In her post “Michael Jackson: Man, Myth, Moonwalker and Alleged Molester” she writes:

Shame on all of these people who chose to ignore the bad things Michael Jackson did. Even in death, people need to tell it like it really is. At least Cher kept it real and spoke how weird he had become. I can appreciate the good things that Michael Jackson did just as well as the bad things he did or was accused of. Do us all a favor and start doing the same!

TGFTG isn’t afraid to state her mind in a commanding way, which is critical in providing some sort of “hook” to her posts from time to time. After all, who wants to read a blog that’s the emotional equivalent of vanilla?

“Even in death, people need to tell it like it really is” comes off almost as a command to the reader, locking in attention and likely inspiring a polarizing opinion - the result of a combination of tempting content and powerful voice. And she then finishes off with an actual direct command in italics, emphasizing the tone of voice (very pointed, demanding) while at the same time visually popping the sentence out of the paragraph.

While writing style and content are two things that have almost unlimited leeway in the blogosphere, these two main characteristics - a deep personal connection with the reader and the ability to have conviction in writing - are things that I would like to focus on going forward. I think it’ll make my blog easier to relate to and more interesting to read every week.

That’s in theory, of course. We’ll see where execution ACTUALLY takes my writing.

does "voice" matter?

Voice could possibly the most important aspect of mainstream blogging today.

I say this because more often than not, bloggers aim to be persona-driven, with wit-filled prose that brings readers back (and back) for more. The sensational success of bloggers like Perez Hilton has inspired regular folk everywhere to try and do the same. So having a great voice to preach has become critical to having a brand in the blogosphere.

“The Girl From the Ghetto”, as she refers to herself as, has quite a voice - and builds it using a variety of methods. One thing I’ve picked up on in particular, though, is how personal she chooses to be. In fact, her anonymity is in stark contrast to how brutally honest she is about every other aspect of her life - particularly her upbringing.

This is pretty evident in many of her posts, and her willingness to share her backstory and moments from her life helps characterize her more than any fancy “About Me” could (not that she doesn’t have that, too).

“20 Books That Should Be Made Into Movies”, for instance, is a post that at first glance hardly seems to beg for a reflection on her past. Yet she does, and it really works to give the reader a personal connection with her and, by transitive property, her writing!

She begins the post with a look at how - and why - books have made an impact on her life from an early age:

I can remember walking around the complex we lived in (alone, but it was the 1970′s, and again, she was mentally ill and now pregnant and married to an idiot who never wanted me around), bragging to all the other mothers how I could spell and even write my full name in cursive. (Being an Italian, this was no easy task.)

The other mothers would bring out a piece of paper for me to demonstrate, as well as a book to read. Even back then, I was a bit dramatic, but I suppose that comes from being around a mother on an unmedicated manic high most of the time.

See, it’s not just the fact that she talks about her past - anyone can do that. But TGFTG chooses to personalize herself in ways that border the outright ballsy. Who would be brave enough to so brazenly illustrate her clearly choppy childhood? I know I certainly would hesitate.

Most importantly, it helps create weight behind her passion for good (“great”, as she says) reading, which is what propels the rest of the post.

In the more conventional sense of “voice”, however, TGFTG isn’t afraid to use sass and sarcasm to emphasize the points she wants to make.

In her post “Michael Jackson: Man, Myth, Moonwalker and Alleged Molester” she writes:

Shame on all of these people who chose to ignore the bad things Michael Jackson did. Even in death, people need to tell it like it really is. At least Cher kept it real and spoke how weird he had become. I can appreciate the good things that Michael Jackson did just as well as the bad things he did or was accused of. Do us all a favor and start doing the same!

TGFTG isn’t afraid to state her mind in a commanding way, which is critical in providing some sort of “hook” to her posts from time to time. After all, who wants to read a blog that’s the emotional equivalent of vanilla?

“Even in death, people need to tell it like it really is” comes off almost as a command to the reader, locking in attention and likely inspiring a polarizing opinion - the result of a combination of tempting content and powerful voice. And she then finishes off with an actual direct command in italics, emphasizing the tone of voice (very pointed, demanding) while at the same time visually popping the sentence out of the paragraph.

While writing style and content are two things that have almost unlimited leeway in the blogosphere, these two main characteristics - a deep personal connection with the reader and the ability to have conviction in writing - are things that I would like to focus on going forward. I think it’ll make my blog easier to relate to and more interesting to read every week.

That’s in theory, of course. We’ll see where execution ACTUALLY takes my writing.

profiling a fellow blogger: "Recently Trendy"

Apparently, there aren’t too many blogs out there that take pop culture analysis seriously. Oftentimes such a subject is featured in a few posts of someone’s otherwise random or entertainment-related blog. Real analysis - which involves research, deep thought, connecting various ideas across society - is harder to find.

Recently Trendy is a blog that does take pop culture seriously. It bills itself as “analyzing pop culture - one trend at a time” and pretty much delivers on that line - the blog talks about things like the rise of judged talent shows, the growing demand for tablet computers and the significance of Rebecca Black (of “Friday” fame/notoriety) to the music industry.

It’s a pretty fascinating collection of thoughts and conclusions that I tend to agree with, and seem to make sense. At the very least, Recently Trendy’s blog inspires thought and discussion, which is something I’d like to do with my blog.

Interestingly, though, the blog has no named author. Through the “About Me” section and the footnote on the blog, it’s clear that it is one person, and the author also goes ahead to note that he/she is “not an expert” and most definitely “not a spokesperson for pop culture today”.

In other words, they’re likely doing the posts as an independent exercise for themselves as opposed to an extension of their career or expertise. It’s possible that they do work in the entertainment field, but I never get the sense that this is the case; the blog posts themselves don’t reference the author’s own credentials.

Regardless, I end up not caring because the writing is at times pretty impressive - as solid as many so-called pop culture bloggers that work professionally. I think this is an absolutely key observation for myself and every other blogger that’s trying to write in a field where they don’t have established credibility. Consistently good writing can and will garner attention. Anything average will not.

And I think that Recently Trendy does a pretty solid job of fleshing out ideas or statements with convincing analysis and background. More importantly, the blog does so while using a balanced voice - more personal and casual when dealing with the author’s own subjective thoughts, and more academic when establishing objective points.

For me, the latter is particularly well-done - intellectual, without overt dryness, like in this example:

Voting is an interesting concept since it may lead to some unpredictable and even undeserving results. It takes the basic foundation of a talent show and turn the format into a popularity contest instead. Yet, this is not purely a democratic vote, as most competitions allow the public to vote multiple times for their favourite contestants. Thus, a small but devoted fan base can possibly triumph over the more widely popular candidates. In essence, the votes indicate the level of passion from the fans, rather than serve as an accurate measure of talent or popularity. As such, this faulty system is sometimes disputed by the voters, especially when it leads to surprising eliminations.

Best of all - and thank the blogging gods for this - Recently Trendy’s writing doesn’t tumble into the quagmire of hyperbole and awful, Perez-Hilton-like attempts at sarcasm and humor that so many entertainment blogs tend to. Apparently, some bloggers realize content and information trumps vapid “personality”.

The source of the blog is pretty much a mystery. I think this is an notable tactic used by a lot of bloggers that want to be judged purely for their work, as opposed to being recognized by friends/family and the like. While I can’t say for certain that this is what the author of Recently Trendy is going for, I wouldn’t be surprised, either. It does create a bit of a distance from the reader to the author - I do, in a way, wish I knew this person better, to connect easier. But anonymity is a major element of the internet, and I don’t blame the author for remaining behind the shutters.

why media?

“What came first, the music or the misery?”

So asks Rob Fleming, the lead character of Nick Hornby’s immensely popular novel High Fidelity. He is in a contemplative mood, perusing his vast record collection in a post-breakup slump.

It’s a simple enough question, but pretty big when you take the second to contemplate it. After all, we imagine that our thoughts and actions are ours and ours only - conscious, independent, controlled. But while this may be partly true, the importance of environment probably shouldn’t be ignored.

The fact is that entertainment media is all around us, swirling in a dynamic and influential hurricane that hits us every day. So what if I hadn’t listened to pop music my entire life? Would I hold the same feelings about love, about relationships and anger and life in general? What if I hadn’t read The Catcher in the Rye? Does Jersey Shore make me stupider? Does listening to shock-rap like old-school Eminem and Odd Future make me more violent?

What came first, the media, or everything I know?

Let’s be honest, though: there aren’t going to be very many easy answers to such loaded questions. As a Lifestyle columnist for the Daily Trojan, I tried to wrestle with the issue of culture, controversy and media and how it can shape our mindsets in a column titled Culture Clash. It was a bit tough; examining new ideas and events and social phenomenon every week hardly provided a blanket answer for readers (and myself) at the end of the semester.

I’m thinking that the same will be true of this blog. At the very least, my weekly ramblings will help ask some curious questions about the world of media that we live in today.

That might seem pointless, but if I’ve learned anything from studying and practicing the discipline of journalism, it’s that we ought to ask more questions (not in the crazed conspiracy theorist/fervent Tea Party activist way, just in the name of learning). And we’re definitely not asking enough questions about all the shit we consume.

And maybe - just maybe - thinking about the media will help better it. I don’t know about you, but I think that American entertainment might be in a little bit of a slump these days. Thankfully, I haven’t seen My Super Sweet Sixteen on too often lately, but we’re still missing a spark of innovation and critical thinking that maybe existed some time ago. It’s time we changed that.

To get down to the nuts and bolts of it, expect writings on small issues, broad topics and everything in between. Anything from viral videos to a stupid moment on cable news to the fate of the film industry is, in my head, fair game. Think Esquire writer Stephen Marche’s always excellent 1000 Words About Our Culture crossed with New York Magazine’s Vulture blog, but with more collaboration.

Okay, so the writing won’t be that excellent, but still.

I hope that you guys will freely ask questions, both about the crazy stuff I might be saying or about other issues or happenings that you think I should bring up. Blogs are hardly the place to get lectured, anyway. They are - or should be - hubs of communication and discourse. So that’s what we’ll try to do here.

And if you end up not really liking what you’re reading...well, it was worth a shot, right?