More Celebrity Help

A couple days ago George Clooney was arrested in Washington, DC, at the Embassy of Sudan while protesting the actions of Omar Al-Bashir, the country's president. The Sudanese government is still bombing and attacking innocent civilians, confirming Al-Bashir's status as an alleged war criminal.


Clooney's plan is to use his celebrity status to draw as much attention as possible to this issue. He says, "I don't make policy. I can just make it louder." Upon hearing this, I was reminded again of the Kony 2012 video we talked about in class. Celebrities such as Justin Bieber and Oprah Winfrey used their star power to draw attention to this video and the issues surrounding Ugandan war criminal Joseph Kony.


I found it interesting that in the past week the only things I have read about both these problems involving war criminals, it has been in regard to the celebrities involved with the issues. It seems that celebrities are becoming America's number one source for providing awareness of global conflicts. Awareness of issues is certainly necessary in order to solve them, but what does is say about our society if the path to this awareness is celebrities? 


Does the way in which we become aware of issues affect if how we go about solving them? Would learning about the war in Sudan through George Clooney talking about it on a talk show vs. learning about it from a newspaper article yield a different response from you?

Public Awareness: The Key to Kony?

The viral video Kony 2012 has certainly reached it's goal of becoming widely known, being that it has received over 64 million views. I wonder though, if this large view count is what will help to reach the video's apparent goal: stopping Joseph Kony. Kony, a Ugandan guerrilla troop leader, has been responsible for the abductions and murders of thousands of Ugandan children for over twenty years.
A man by the name Jason Russell created this video in order to raise awareness about the issue, in order to stop it.

Still from Kony 2012

Raising awareness is clearly a large theme in the video. In it, Russell says, "It’s obvious that Kony should be stopped; the problem is 99% of the planet doesn’t know who he is. If they knew, Kony would have been stopped long ago." I question Russell's implication that the reason Kony hasn't been stopped is directly related to the number of people who know about it. Of course spreading awareness couldn't hurt, but I worry that the people who are sharing this link/spreading word about the video has less to do with taking action against Kony, and more to do with people's obsessions with disasters covered by media.


Don DeLillo has this fascination with disasters a running theme throughout White Noise. In chapter 14, Jack narrates a scene of him and his family are watching floods, earthquakes and other disasters on TV and says, “Every disaster made us wish for more, for something bigger, grander, more sweeping” (64). Not that I am saying those who watched the Kony 2012 video are happy that such a calamity is occurring, but perhaps they got a sort of twisted excitement in sharing it with other people. How effective can this way of spreading the video around be?


I know that personally, after watching the video I was inspired to take action to help stop Kony. My action only went as far as telling some friends about it, however. I have a feeling that many other video viewers did the same. 

A Stroke of Genius

Yesterday I had a Genius Bar appointment at the Apple Store for the first time. I was having two issues: 1) When trying to buy a new song on iTunes I now always receive the message "Your session has timed out. Try again," and 2) My iPod recently stopped synching with my iTunes library. Lucky for me making a Genius appointment was as easy as clicking a few buttons on Apple's website.

When I got to the store, I was told to report to the "tall man with the beard and iPad"-- I didn't even have the burden of learning his name. The iPad man told me that one of the "Geniuses" would be with me shortly, and in the meantime I could look around the store. I was drawn to the new iPhone 4S, and entertained myself by checking out the apps. One, by they way, was called "Airport Sounds"with its description being: "This app contains a set of various sounds which are sure to entertain you." Maybe Don DeLillo is really on to something- Being that his characters in White Noise are often comforted by sound.

By the time my "Genius" came to help me, I had almost forgotten why I was there in the first place. How could I forget that I was there because I was unsatisfied with their product? After explaining my issues I quickly learned that they had no fix for the first problem of not being able to purchase music, and that I would have to call iTunes support for that. As for my iPod, the "Genius" played around with a couple different cords to plug it into my computer with and looked at the connection port with a flashlight. All of which took less than five minutes. She then asked me, "How would you like a new iPod, no charge?" Of course I told her that this would be great. 

I caught myself feeling very satisfied after leaving the store, thinking that I had even had fun. This soon  went away however, when I told my dad the exciting news of getting a new iPod. He told me he wasn't surprised because Apple's profits have recently been more than $1 billion a week, that they must have more money than they know what to do with. I was then reminded of the horrible Apple factory conditions we talked about in class. How many other customers received free iPods this week? How many factory workers received a higher wage? 

Why was I so easily distracted from these negative thoughts until I left the store? What does my experience reveal about the culture of consumption?

Fallacious and Malicious

With the topics we discuss in American Studies (more specifically regarding Don DeLillo's White Noise) becoming increasingly relevant to my everyday life, I was not surprised to hear a story on the news tonight with which I found myself relating to a class discussion. 


Sandra Fluke, a student at Georgetown University, has been trying to persuade the administration for the past three years that birth control should be included in religious institutions' health insurance plans for students. This, of course, caused a big controversy because many believe that this would be violating Freedom of Religion, being that certain religions are against the use of contraceptives or pre-marital sex. Part of Fluke's argument included that a number of women use birth control for medical reasons, such as preventing ovarian cysts. 

More info and Limbaugh's message to "Feminazis"
can be viewed HERE

One of Fluke's biggest critics is Rush Limbaugh, a radio talk show host who is a well known conservative. In his argument to opposing Fluke he stated that the fact that she wants the school to cover birth control costs suggests that she is trying to promote casual sex. He says another reason for her wanting contraception coverage is that she is "having so much sex she can't afford her own birth control pills" and goes on to call her a "slut." As if it couldn't get any worse, Limbaugh later offers up his own compromise stating: "Miss Fluke, and the rest of you Feminazis, here’s the deal. If we are going to pay for your contraceptives ... we want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.” (!!!)


Upon hearing Limbaugh's argument I was immediately reminded of our recent class discussion about fallacies. His claims are teeming with hasty generalizations as well as ad hominem (when one attacks the arguer rather than the argument). It is not a logical assumption that because Fluke thinks religious institutions' insurance plans should cover contraception, she must sleep around. It also certainly does not advance his argument to dub his opponent a "slut." Sadly for Limbaugh, I believe he is only weakening his own credibility by stating such absurdities and becoming a victim of his own demise.