Analysis of a Political Article

I came across something on Young PAP, an article called “To The Devotees of Western Democracy and Human Rights.” Since I believe that idiocy has to be dealt with using a large hammer, so here goes…

First, the author has tried to justify the “superiority” of Asian values over Western values. Well, in every culture, ethnocentrism is present--the dominant values are always seen as superior over other values--it is one of the things which contribute to identity. But one has to ask the question if it is right, or even if it does make sense to use such a blanket-term like “Asian Values”.

Second, the author accuses the West of cultural imperialism. As quoted "And these were also the nations [European powers] that, at the height of their imperialism, imposed, by sheer brute force, the ‘right’ of extra-territoriality upon the countries they had subjected. And now, they are crusading for Freedom and Human Rights in their former colonies as well as the other countries of Asia." Of course the West can be cultural imperialists, since they have the might and the money.But in using the word ‘crusading’ is a bit extreme. The author has displayed his ignorance of political language and should have avoided using such a word as the very concept of Jihad by Muslim fundamentalists go back to the Crusades. For “Asian Values” overseas – what, Singapore is trying to strike back? With what force?


In fact, in my opinion, Western values are so important for Singapore that you can’t do without them. If we don’t want Western values, then we should chase foreigners out, especially the educated Westerners in our universities, and we should, of course, send our scholars not to Europe anymore! So what is being said is that for our author, he is grossly short-sighted: this smacks of a way to stay in power, by using a vague term to make one system sound better than the other. Without any agreed definitions, this is just RHETORICS.

The "Anglophile" may be despised, but maybe our author should be too, since he is doing nothing much more than building castles in the air, i.e. calling others to take up arms against the Western cultural crusade (seriously, were you with the Taliban?) based on a term which is so general that it is empty, and using the rhetoric of certain senior citizens who deem fit to travel the world and impose their own brand of imperialism under the motto of “leave us alone, you have no idea what it is like to rule an Asian country,” yadda, yadda. Yes, what were you thinking?

The Sprial of Silence Theory

This week, our communications lecturer introduced several media theories and models to us. I would like to share with all of you this media theory that has been developed by a famous scientist. I find it relatively pertinent to today's word despite it being developed 30 plus year ago.

German Political Scientist Elizabeth Noelle-Neumann developed the Spiral of Silence theory back in 1972. She suggested that when our opinions do not match those of the majority we become silent and refrain from voicing those opinions out of fear of social isolation. Researchers have found fairly strong support for this theory—particularly when those opinions concern moral or ethical issues. However, the world has changed dramatically since 1972—particularly the way we communicate publicly. Have new communication technologies influenced the Spiral of Silence theory?



In 1972, one would receive most of the news from television, radio, and newspapers. Today, new communication media abound and old media are dying. In 1972, news was disseminated fairly uniformly from three fairly similar television networks. Individuals who expressed a minority view that differed from that presented on the nightly news might be sanctioned with derision, silence, or nonverbal cues of disapproval (sneering, eye rolling, etc.) from others Of course, the primary place one could express a minority view back in 1972 was in conversation. Not many people could present their views publicly (exceptions might be writing a letter to the editor or participating in a public protest).

Today, the opportunity for individuals to speak out publicly about issues that concern them has increased dramatically. Indeed, people can make their views know publicly all without ever engaging in conversation with close friends or acquaintances. The Internet has opened doors for people to express their minority opinions publicly and still retain anonymity. The proliferation of media outlets (multiple television channels, Internet, etc.) allows virtually all minority viewpoints a hearing. So, what do these changes in technology mean for the Spiral of Silence theory?

Do we feel more or less threatened in a conversation to express an unpopular opinion? Are we more or less likely to stand up for our viewpoint in a group of people who do not agree with us?

I agree with this theory. Those who don’t agree with the majority, often risk getting shredded apart. Society almost never forgives individuals who are against “common sense.” Just look at what happened to the protestors of the Brazilian dictatorship.

But that’s all back in the world of the generatopm X’s, Baby Boomers, and Veterans. In the world of generation Y’s (our generation), this theory simply doesn’t apply. Today the norm is disagreement. The dissonance comes from young people, very young people who aren’t afraid to question, contest, and protest.


Online communities, chat forums, and social networks, are the greatest proof of this. It’s very common to see young people joining online communities where they criticize the very businesses they are applying to be a part of. They say what they think without any filters. The spiral of silence is over. Today it’s cool to disagree! And people are actually the opposite of what Noelle-Newman argues. And they are admired and respected, precisely for that.


Today we have the great freedom of being able to say what we think. I believe that generation Y and the generations after them will really benefit from this freedom, which no other generation has experienced up until now. They probably won’t realize how valuable this freedom is, for they haven’t experienced the sourness of not being able to really say what they think, as those before them did. So it seems that the theories of communication will have to silence the very spiral of silence.


What do you think? Does the Spiral of Silence still hold? Are you more or less willing to say what you think about controversial issues in face-to-face conversations than you were 10, 20, 30, or 40 years ago?

How to survive group projects?

As we are nearing the mid-terms and facing various project submissions for our modules this semester, I have a few tips on how to survive group projects that I would like to share with all my juniors here.

From my 3-year experience in UB, I have gathered that the way to survive group projects is to team up with the awesome people & forge a bond to get around the uselessness of the rest of your group. If you play your cards right, you can overcome more incompetence than you ever thought you could! Here’s how you do it:

1. You & the awesome people will do the majority of the real work. Get used to it. This is how it’s going to be for the rest of your life. If you wanted to not do work, you shouldn’t have been so awesome. Live & learn.

2. You can give a little of real work to the competent with minor prodding people with very specific instructions. Take turns sending them encouraging & over-praising emails. Let these people think they are in with the awesome people. This keeps them happy & semi-productive.

3. Give things that are kind of important but can be done at the last minute—the works cited, executive summary, appendices, & Power Point slides—to the competent but lazy people. The key is to never give them anything that anyone else in your group will have to wait on to be able to do their part. Make them wait for the rest of you, not the other way around.

4. Give things that are necessary but time-consuming & hard to mess up—table of contents, charts & graphs, title page with everyone’s names even though not everyone worked on the project—to the incompetent but not lazy people. These are also excellent people to be put in charge of the printing, but someone from one of the competent groups needs to check everything before you turn it in.

5. Have the incompetent AND lazy people “proofread” everything. Make sure that you save the version you have before they get their hands on it.

6. When peer evaluations come around, agree with everyone that these people did not make positive contributions to the group. Do NOT do anything unless you are sure the rest of your group agrees to do it together. If you are the only giving a bad peer eval to a person & that person gives you a bad eval too, the professor will have no choice but to assume that the two of you had a personal vendetta. However if everyone in the group gives the person a bad eval & that person gives you a bad eval, the professor will assume that that person is “not a team player.” And that is the sweetest revenge.

I guess I sound a little angsty when I wrote the above tips, but I guess it's always good to heed some advice from a senior who has been through much more than you :D

Platonic Love

Love one another, but make not a bond of love

Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls.

Fill each other’s cup, but drink not from one cup.

Give one another of your bread, but eat not from the same loaf.

Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone,

Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music.

Give your hearts, but not into each other’s keeping;

For only the hand of Life can contain your hearts.

And stand together yet not too near together;

For the pillars of the temple stand apart,

And the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other’s shadow.

--Kahlil Gibran (The Prophet)--

When it comes to relationships between straight women and men or other couplings of a homosexual nature, is it possible that there can be such a thing as platonic love? Of course opinions differ greatly on this subject. Some would argue that if a couple is in love they would not remain platonic and others would say that if they are platonic they are not actually in love.

There are reasons that a couple may choose to be platonic. I think that amongst those reasons are: religious beliefs, spiritual beliefs, physical limitations and sometimes, even fear. If a couple is choosing to a hold off on a sexual side of their relationship for whatever reason I believe that it is still very possible for them to be completely in love with one another. Perhaps their relationship is built more on affection and pleasures outside of the act of sex. For example, if the couple chooses not to become physical within their union until they are married, it is still entirely possible that they have connected emotionally on such a level that it can be described in no other way than pure love.

On the other side of the fence though, people would say that a relationship that is not sexual in nature is merely and affectionate friendship. The argument here, is that two people can really care for one another and genuinely have feelings but not actually be in love. One could argue that each person’s description of love is different though.

Platonic love seems to have exactly long into our history though. The thought of two people who are committed unconditionally to one another while remaining platonic has been written in stories many times over the years. The actually term “platonic love” dates back to the 15th century. The term, platonic is actually derived from Plato’s symposium concept and has been almost romanticized in our history. This is particularly the case in regards to the English High Court in the days of King Charles the first. In the years to follow however, political and social changes would make the premise of platonic love less popular.

In this day in age though, platonic love is often questioned. People are suspicious of the idea that a couple can harbor deep, emotional feelings towards one another but not engage in sexual activity. People who believe in platonic love and feel that this is a very real form of relationship have often said that the feelings and urges that are experienced with a sexual relationship are often expressed in a different form when in a platonic relationship. Some say it is more an attraction of the mind and that the urges that they experience are transmitted into more of a spiritual connection with the other person. In most cases though, what may start as a friendship can easily evolve into a platonic relationship then platonic love and may eventually lead into a loving relationship that includes sex. Most would agree that a relationship that starts in a form of friendship has the best chance of success as opposed to relationships that start out on a sexual level. This would indicate that platonic love definitely has a place in our society today.

What is your take on Platonic Love? Do you believe in it?

Hand Gestures

This week, I watched this video clip on nonverbal communication from Youtube. I highly recommend everyone in our communications class to watch this video. The video clip is a talk given by Body Language Expert Jan Hargrave, teaching women how to detect if their partners are lying to them. It is educational yet hilarious.


In the video clip, Jan Hargrave talked about the hand gestures when taking an oath. It seems that the hand gesture of putting one's right hand up when taking an oath is rather universal and there has been a lot of studies done to determine if someone really means what he or she says just by observing that particular hand gesture. But how confident can we say that someone is truthful or not just by observing his or her body language? As a matter of fact, the majority of our message sent to the other receiver(s) are communicated through nonverbal rather than verbal means, this means that when we are presenting ourselves, we hould not only pay attention to our verbal messages which could most of the time be scripted and rehearsed. What is more important is the spontaneous and impromptu body language; it has to be consistent with our verbal message so that we do not portray ourselves to be hypocrite or keeping something from the other party.

On the other hand, are all hand gestures universal? I do not think so. Here are some hand gestures that I know of that are not univeral. These are cultural-specific and in different cultures across the world, the same gestures may take on a different meaning.

1. The “I Love You" Hand Gesture Consisting of a clenched fist with the second and fifth fingers straightened out, the hand gesture has most recently been adopted by fans of rock and heavy metal music, first used by Black Sabbath vocalist Ronnie James Dio. The gesture carries only a vague meaning, implying the presence of Satan, malevolence and loud guitar music, and is used in much the same way as headbanging. However, the hand gesture is actually positive in Buddhism and Hinduism. It is known as the Karana Mudra in such circles, and is used to dispel evil – an interestingly opposite meaning to its contemporary significance. Nowadays, popularized by Japanese drama, the hand gesture means "I Love You" in Asia.

2. The “OK” Sign Mainly used by scuba divers to mean “OK” (to prevent ambiguity with the thumbs-up sign, which means “ascend", and in America and the UK is often used to tell somebody that they’ve made a great meal, as talking with your mouth would just be impolite. Essentially the meaning comes out as “great”, or “absolutely fine”. Not so, however, in a few countries in Europe, where the numerical interpretation gives the signal an insulting overtone – essentially you’re telling them that you think they’re a ‘zero’.
Far worse, however, is the meaning in Brazil, Germany and a few Mediterranean countries: the circular shape of the gesture gives it the meaning of “anus”, and is therefore used to call somebody an “asshole”, or, by extension, a homosexual.

3. The "Thumbs Up" While Western culture has become used to the thumbs-up as a positive, informal signal, generally indicating a job well done (probably stemming from World War II pilots using the signal to communicate that they were “good to go” with ground crews), there are cultures where a thumbs-up may land you in trouble. In most of Latin America and West Africa, as well as Greece, Russia, Sardinia and the south of Italy, the thumbs-up basically means the same as the middle finger: “sit on it and swivel”. Also, it’s generally not recommended to use the thumbs-up around the Middle East as it’s pretty much the biggest insult out there.

All in all, most hand gestures, as with other body languages are usually ambiguous and take on different meanings in different cultures. Therefore, it is important to note that one should be consistent in his or her verbal and nonverbal cues when communicating with other people. Also, never attempt to lie, because somehow or another, the party can observe your truthfulness through your nonverbal cues which is often not part of your rehearsed script.

First Impressions

Recently, I've completed reading Jane Austen's novel "Pride and Prejudice".It was originally named "First Impressions" as the story develops around the how first impressions affect interpersonal relationships between the story's characters. Therefore, I have decided to blog about the importance of creating good first impressions and how to create good first impressions in our daily lifes.

According to recent research done at Harvard Medical School entitled Very First Impressions, "Humans are excellent in judging personality traits and complex social characteristics such as dominance, hierarchy, warmth, and threat." So basically, when you meet someone new they decide instantly whether or not they wish to have further communications with you, based on if they feel your personalities match. Therefore, first impressions can be quite important.

Firstly, everyone uses cognitive schematas when they form a perception of others. We all get a first impression of a new person that creates a mental image of his or her personality in our minds. That image often lasts and can affect the relationship that follows.

Secondly, we also play different roles in relationships and by playing these roles, we leave different impressions on different people. With our parents we play one role, with friends another, with someone we are interested in/in love with a third, when shopping for clothes in a store a fourth. And so on.

Therefore, a good first impression is important can create a positive role in the minds of the new people we meet. When we meet them again, we are often drawn back into this role. The rest of the discussion are some of the things I’ve learned about improving first impressions. Of course, different environments like business meetings with suits and ties or parties with umbrella-drinks come with different goals and expectations so figure out what's appropriate and useful in each meeting.

Act as if you are meeting a good friend

If you just imagine that the person you have just met and are talking to is one of your best friends you’ll probably adjust unconsciously and start to smile, open up your body-language to a very friendly and warm position and reduce any nervousness or weirdness in your tone of voice and body-language. Don't overdo it though, you might not want to hug and kiss right away.
The nice thing about this is that you may also start to feel positive feelings towards this new person, just as you do with your friend when you meet him/her. This is a pretty good starting-point for getting them to reciprocate and for developing a good relationship. Remember, the words are only 7 percent of your communication. 93 percent is in your tone of voice and your body-language.

Be positive

A way to convey a positive attitude in a first meeting is to read the mood of person(s) before you start talking – by just observing them. Then - when you have an emotional connection and the other person feels you are similar to him/her - you can let your positivity arise a bit more.

Mentally rehearse before you even enter the room

Visualize how great the events will unfold - see and hear it - and also how great will you feel at this meeting. See yourself smiling, being positive, open and having a great time. See the excellent outcome in your mind. Then release by visualizing that it has already happened, that the meeting is over with the desired result. This is surprisingly effective and will get you into a great and relaxed mood before even stepping into the first, second or twentieth meeting.

Hopefully with these tips on creating impressions, we will become better communicators and presenters!

Not Everyone Is Lovin' Japan's New McDonald's Mascot

McDonald's is currently running an advertising campaign in Japan that uses Mr. James, a bumbling white guy who speaks broken katakana (i.e. accented) Japanese. Basically a "gaijin", a derogatory term for a foreigner in Japan, he's even got his own blog while he tours McDonald's locations across Japan. People are upset because he's perpetuating racist stereotypes, and comparisons to Stepin Fetchit are being made. Stern letters has been written to McDonald's by FRANCA, a human rights group concerned with the rights of non-Japanese residents in Japan.

Here are 2 commercials out of the 4 used in the advertising campaign.

Throughout the years, McDonald's advertisements have focused not only on product, but rather on the overall McDonald's experience, portraying warmth and a real slice of everyday life. This "image" or "reputation" advertising has become a trademark of the company. Although the advertisements are effective as they are humorous and also create resonance with the target audience (the Japanese) as they are playing to Japan’s xenophobic tendencies. However, these advertisements fail to amplify the emotional impact as they do not engage a personal connection with the McDonald’s brand—a friendly, family-oriented brand has now been associated with racism, stereotyping and cultural-insensitivity.

From a cultural studies perspective whereby close relationship exists between acts of communication (called discursive acts or texts) and power, communication is being linked to social forces such as capitalism, racism, colonialism etc. as text exert power over people who consume them. In the context of McDonald’s advertisements shown above, racism and cultural imperialism exists.

Firstly, McDonald’s is guilty of racism as it portrayed Mr. James, as an expatriate who speaks broken katakana Japanese. This is a negative stereotype because Mr. James is not a good representation of expatriates in Japan. McDonald’s is also culturally insensitive by assuming all expatriates cannot speak fluent, non-accented Japanese. In Asia, McDonald's have become a symbol for the desire to embrace Western cultural norms but it does not have to resort to poor taste and offensive advertising to appeal to its Asian consumers. Although the stereotype is useful and aids communication by using easily understood symbolic meanings shared by its Japanese audience, the stereotype has relied on a characteristic that is negative and exaggerated and , in so doing, reduces the group (Western expatriates in Japan) to a caricature. Using such a strategy makes advertising a participant in shaping and reinforcing that cultural value.

Secondly, although McDonald’s is a global enterprise, it has made mistakes by overlaying their worldview on that of another culture without thinking about the impact of their advertising. This is known as cultural imperialism—because the Western world views Asians as incapable of speaking fluent and non-accented English doesn’t mean that likewise, Asians, view Westerners as incapable of speaking fluent and non-accented Asian languages.

Finally, children are also audience of McDonald’s advertisements. Children are vulnerable as they do not always know what is good for them and what is not. McDonald’s has to take up certain responsibilities for the racist message sent by their advertisements by portraying expatriates in such a negative light. Advertisers have a responsibility to ensure that what is portrayed is accurate and representative.

One important lesson that can be learnt here is that advertisers and communicators should always show respect for culture and local customs as their insensitivity to local customs can adversely impact not just the effectiveness of their advertising campaign but also their brand image which is key to their marketing success.

Do you like Mr. James? Why or why not?

Welcome (((((((((((((:

Welcome to my E-portfolio for COM101. This E-portfolio will be updated by every Sunday from this week onwards. Feel free to leave comments on the topics that are discussed

Cheers,
Helena