Aren't Documentaries supposed to be real??

     We all believe that documentaries convey us the truth; sometimes a hidden shocking truth and sometimes just a beautiful and miraculous truth concerning the nature. Through such truth, in the mist of information described in documentaries, we seek pleasure, knowledge, and most important of all, morals.
     However, WHAT IF THE DOCUMENTARY IS NOT ENTIRELY TRUE?? Does it give hamful effects to people??
     The producers of the documentary 'Catfish', Yaniv Schulman and his filmmaker brother Henry, claim that the documentary is a complete truth, without any forms of manipulation of the truth. Nobody can rebut the claim for there is a possibility; the only problem is that the possibility seems to be quite low. It should be a remarkable coincidence...
     Dubious factor comes directly from the first. When Yaniv mentions "she seems to be very pretty and talented YET", it sounds as if he knows the whole story and is trying to dramatize it. In addition, why would any filmmaker start making a documentary with so plain story like a photographer meeting a girl who has interest in drawing pictures through social network sites? Does it have anything special to be sold to public? As well, documentaries need motives and goals.... What are they here?? To portray how the plain people become friends?? There comes a reasonable doubt!!
     With all due respect to such doubts however, I cannot agree upon the thought that this documentary ultimately does more harm than good.
     First clear and obvious reason is that the main figures featuring in this film did benefit a lot by making this film. Yaniv was awarded a very honorable prize and became a celebrity. Angela opened her art gallery and many people are buying them. What a WIN-WIN documentary!!
     Some people argue that it gives indirect harm to Abby or facebook company. I do concede that Abby may feel ashamed of her mother. However, Abby didnot instantaneously show any signs of being ashamed, and for Angela is not ashamed of her conducts, she would be able to tell Abby about what she felt, what she had in mind and she would be able to sufficiently excuse herself. In the matter of facebook company, I think the documentary played its genuine role here: warning people of the possible harm of social network sites. For this incident is very rare undoubtedly, the documentary is actually benefiting the Facebook company that the number of future identity crime victims will be lessened. Also, for the users, since they would be very cautious and careful in using facebook, it would raise their sense of safety.
     After all, I really enjoyed the documentary, and no matter if it is completely true or forged to some degree, the documentary is not harming the society as some critics argue. Hope the fascinating plot does more good than harm to the society~!

Possible Debate Motions are

1. THBT documentary should be filmed upon only the truth
2. THBT social network sites should ban the creation of multi-accounts (some people- involving some teachers in KMLA make two accounts; one for students and one for private acquaintances)
3. THBT Yaniv is a victim in the documentary

Watching the speech of Johanna Blakley....

Yesterday, I was watching 'Boston Legal', one of the American dramas dealing with court cases and lawyers' lives. In the episode, the law firm sued a television company for not providing enjoyable programs for the elderly over 50s. In the status quo, television companies, further the social media themselves, recognize and organize their viewers through demographic categories. We often see companies analyzing their viewer ratings by age!!
Johanna Blakley, in the TED video, argues that social media companies should now change themselves and shift their way of categorizing the viewers. Claiming that difference in online activity-engagements come not from demographics but from difference in interests, Blakley suggests that the companies should focus on difference in thoughts, interests, and perspectives when they categorize and target certain viewers. As her speech goes on, she also claims that women are now the leading viewers of media; women are the majority viewers and participants in various social media and networks.
Blakley's speech clearly describes many changes in social trend- especially those regarding gender issues and social media. However, she seems to disvalue the importance of analysis on demographics.
Analyzing viewers by demographics still plays a significant role. Obvious gap between generations exist in the status quo, and different generations, under different culture and tradition, exhibit different preferences to programs. Definite example would be a recent survey conducted by KSI (Korean Statistics Institution) on different preferences of people when they watch televisions. people in the 10s and 20s mainly preferred music programs and entertainment programs whereas most 40s and 50s pursued documentaries, news, and other leisure programs like fishing, travelling, and so forth. Though I concede that difference in interests should be regarded as one of the key factors, the phenomenon is mainly happening within youngsters. As long as cultural differences between generations exist, media companies should still focus on ages.

Possible Debate motions would be

1. THBT the broadcasting companies should be mandated to make programs targetting people over 50s
2. THBT women are leading the social networks expansion
3. THBT age limits on joining online social networks should be abolished

How Blessed I Am

     As I was watching the speech  of Patricia Ryan, various minds preoccupied my mind. One of them was the economics paper that I am currently working on. I am writing a thesis in ENGLISH..... though I am Korean, and though the paper deals with Korean corporations. Why is this ridiculous pheonomenon taking place?- it's because English is the "global language".
  'All the modernized prestigious universities are in United States and United Kingdom, and every person thus has to learn English to pass exams and ace the admission to such schools......'
     How sad, and How dare can we say this?
     Last week, I engaged in a voluntary service that I am quite sure that I will remember for the rest of my life. I went to the church, which offered after school education service to kids under 12. There I met these small kids who were very bright and playful; but bore huge pain. One of the kids, whose parents were divorced and thus was living only with his father, was very hyperactive. I asked him why, and he said that his mother was visiting him the next day- for the weekend. I asked him how often he sees his mother, and he told me that it was a very rare incident. I was extremely and harrowingly sad and I pitied him very much; a 12 year old boy was being so happy because he finally can see his mother for 2 days..... How blessed I am!!.....??
     Another child was even living alone. Her parents were divorced, and were gone. Her only brother was in U.S. The 12 year old girl looked careworn; AT THAT YOUNG AGE... How blessed I am!!.....??
     The other child was even more pitiful. He did not have any family, friends, and he even had some mental disease. Looking at him smiling as if the world had blessed him and looking at him smiling at me for trying to help him, I was very very pitiful. How blessed I am!!.....??
     I was assigned to teach English to the three kids. They were eager to learn, but the environment was not favorable. We only had one text book, which was not even a new one. For the whole time I was with them, I was concerned with one very serious question; "Is this really a necessary thing?"
     In KMLA, all students including me struggle to learn and improve our English. Obviously there are many reasons, but the primary one is to get high scores from tests. We have to take SATs, APs, and IBTs~!! After teaching the kids as hard as I could, I suddenly noticed: "Maybe I am not the blessed one..." If English works as a barrier for such poor kids in succeeding in today's society, if English helps killing a languate every 14days, and if English does not change the world, WHY DO I HAVE TO LEARN ENGLISH??!!
     Korean language is an extremely scientific and well-organized language; we Koreans have to protect it from disappearing. Personally I value the purpose of learning English very very much. It is just that...... the modern trend of repudiating and ignoring all non-English using students and of enforcing people to learn English is no good. I see greater value in watching and guiding the kids in unfortunate conditions.
   "The children can lead Africa from a dark continent to a good continent", an African student said.
Perhaps, it's not the English that builds up true potential and develops true ability. Always remember how blessed you are and I am, and try somehow to protect own languages and stop putting too much pressure on learning English, for there are way more valuable concepts and qualities.

30days of "Not Washing"

     The "30days" documentary provides an eccentric and somehow interesting environment- such as 'A straight man in gay world', 'A strict christian living with muslims', and 'living with a minimum wage'- and watches the outcome. Though the situation is unlikely-to-happen, people can grasp the distant world and somehow assimilate to the culture. After watching "30days of a straight man in gay world", I, who considered myself a homophobic, noticed that gays are all the same; except for their sexual preference. They eat same food, they play same sports, and they are humane. I was pleased to win from the prejudice that gays are totally disgusting people and that they are not same as straight men in every sense. Thus, I agree that "30days" documentaries are educational, and even further, that they can redress our biases.
     Hoping that my "30days" program can teach a meaningful lesson as well, I'd like to propose my idea; "30days of NOT WASHING". 'How dirty the person would get and how displeased people would become to see such filthy scene', you might ask. It does, however, have a clear intention: it not only emphasizes the importance of cleaning yourself, but it can verify such rumors as 'It's better to take a shower only 4times a week to protect your hair and avoid hair loss'.
     Before elaborating the specific plan, let's go over some definition and past instances. For "washing", it means 'no showering, no hair washing, no teeth cleaning, and no deodorant." Also, I'd like the participants be MYSOPHOBICS- who are extremely obsessed with cleaning themselves- and normal people- who are not that obsessed with cleaning themselves. (OMG~! I'm really excited to see the results~:) ) There are many past experiments about the "NOT CLEANING" issue.
--http://web.mac.com/jfmori/iWeb/nz/No%20Shampoo%20Experiment/No%20Shampoo%20Experiment.html :  This is the 'NO SHAMPOO experiment'. This girl thought that the shampoo can be too harsh for her hair, because it strips all the natural oils from her hair. Thus, she quitted using shampoos and used hair conditioners and other stuffs to rinse her hair. There are many self-confirming photos and 'no shampoo' seems to work very well~!
--http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2013327538_nonbathers02.html : This is an article criticizing those people who are too much obsessed with 'I should not stink at all'. My small opinion on the issue is 'what's the matter if you stink a little? Wouldn't it be better than wearing all the toxic chemicals from deodorants, perfumes, cosmetics and so on?'
--http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-477378/Six-weeks-wash-The-soapless-experiment.html : This is a story of a lady who got sick of using all the odorful chemicals to clean herself and trying to artificially make herself beautiful with excessive usage of cosmetics. She quitted cleaning her self for 40days and decided to use a bar of soap, organic shampoo and conditioner, and a basic moisturiser in cleaning herself. WOW~!
     In the program, every participants will get daily health check. It would include hair health testing, skin health testing, mental state testing- for if you don't wash yourself, sometimes you get to hate yourself- and other fundamental health tests. They will be under surveilance for 30days and all their behaviors will be recorded. Hopefully, this program will enable people to notice what happens both physically and mentally when you don't take a shower, what your reaction is, and what is the suitable interval to use shampoo or take a shower, and so on.
     It is very hard to anticipate or predict the result, for people usually wash themselves- at least people around me- and thus, don't know what it feels like to not take a shower for 30days. However, my slightest guess is that mysophobics will suffer from extreme mental distress and might have a seizure. Large number of people will try to reach water to clean themselves. And for the rest of the incidents.... LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN REALITY~!!!!!

     In 2008, professors at Seoul National University publicly complained about all the application essays being identical in their ideas, contents, and structures. Such standardization comes mainly from the uniform education students receive; they are always told to write the formal answer sheet. In the field of formal tests and college admission, the matter gets even more serious and complicated. In order to attain high scores, students adopt same techniques and styles without having any doubt or hesitating. For example, almost every Korean private education institutes teach their students to write the SAT essay in a very strictly structured form. They are told to use similar contextured examples, vocabularies, and so on. These methods may bring us with high scores. The purpose of writing essay, however, is not to fill the fancy ready-made phrases in a strict form; it is rather about expressing personal ideas. Take a glance at the current situation; where is our individuality and creativity?
     Before discussing whether my creativity has enhanced or not, let me clarify the concept of 'creativity'. Creativity comes in many different meanings to various people. Some people define the term as an act of creating any unique things or ideas. Some denote creativity as devising things that had not been thought of. Although the precise definition may be equivocal, the key concept is quite clear: creativity is creating something that is fresh and special.
     From my childhood, I had a frequent contact with critical thinking-inducing games such as sudoku and puzzle. People approved me of being creative, and they still do. Due to such efforts to constantly promote rational and logical thinking, I find my creativity quality as it was back in the young ages.
     I encounter many unique people in KMLA. Undoubtedly talented, many students have great interest in various fields and they always talk about mind-catching facts or stories. Joining their thoughts, I can imagine and feel the new world and can experience many perspectives of accepting certain situations. Thus, I am very happy with the surrounding of KMLA~!
     Now let us go over the speech made by Sir Robinson.
     Sir Robinson claims that education thrusts out the children's creative capacities. He argues that even though all people have extraordinary talents in their early days, the modern education system does not develop their aptitudes. It is mostly because the current education system puts huge emphasis on useful subjects, but not on others; dancing class is never treated as importantly as mathematics class. Consequently, many talented kids think they have no latent abilities because underestimated subjects are not valued and are even stigmatized. Sir Robinson, thus, urges the education system to broaden its outlook and acclaim children's diverse capacities. Through such process, the knighted sir contends, children would be able to make valuable advancements in the future that is nearly impossible to grasp or predict.
     The idea of developing a favorable environment for children to seek for their talents and to develop such potentials is fabulous. Especially in Korea where math and English are given huge weight, the education system needs to be reformed since it can not fathom extremely diverse talents of children. Then, how should it be changed?
     Introduction of a program that helps children to experience variety of things and a program that offers specialized education would be effective. The programs will assist children to find their talents and develop them. Specialized education is not an education where students learn only one thing. They must learn basic knowledge. It's just that they are learning a subject in a very deep depth rather than studying all subjects in comparatively slight depth.
     Sir Robinson's speech was very congenial to the status quo where education is deteriorating children's creativity. Although I myself think my creativity is quite developed and even though I think KMLA is a very creative place, it is obvious that the current education system must be changed. Contriving a new program that will help children to gain much experiences and offer specialized education on talented field would open a wider opportunity for success to children.


FOR DEBATE MOTIONS,

1. THBT private institutions should be eliminated
2. THBT specialized education should not be offered to young children
3. THBT all classes must be taught for same period of time

Michael Moore's Highschool Newspaper - Is It A Real Democracy?

     Last year, one of the freshmen in KMLA posted an article expressing his opinion about conflicts between two prevailing Korean school teachers' union(http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/opinion/because/418809.html)
It was rather radical, for the article condemned the fundamental structure of Korean education which had the possibility of conveying the false idea that KMLA itself was supporting these radical views. What was interesting was that the school did not make it an issue that its name came up in the article- when even the students gave full vent to their defiant feelings! At the moment, I was excited by the 'freedom of speech' we students have in school; we are free to share our opinions even if that is a radical political claim!
     Having retained confidence in our assured liberty in KMLA, I could not feel empathy for the problem Michael Moore pointed out; it was a distant issue for me (I assume that you know Michael Moore and his arguments^^). Students in KMLA are free to speak or write their own thoughts about school; they are even encouraged to make suggestions under the idea of student autonomy. For instance, current EOP helper system was contrived and settled by students of EOP department; Chicken Day was originally settled by proposals made by students.
     Putting aside all the gratifications of freedom I feel, I cannot join Moore's movements. Michael Moore's arguments have critical fallacies.
     Moore and his "Highschool Newspaper" is biased. Though he claims to advocate unrestrained share of diverse opinions from students, he puts too much emphasis on 'reforms'- all his articles commend student 'uprisings'. The topics he posts up on his website (http://mikeshighschoolnews.com/) are clearly urging for criticism. How would students stand in a stance in support of government or school when the topic is 'Live from Madison: What's happening now?' and Moore himself is covering his webpage with writings that lauds student protests?- Madison is the place where recent student protests occurred. When the topic fails to embrace all kinds of ideas-both for and against the school policies, it is not an authentic democracy that Moore's movement aims for.
     The credibility of information used in his webpage rouses suspicion. Anonymity is an equivocal concept. Its meaning reaches further than just its explicit denotation that your name and identity wouldnot be revealed. It can be used to humiliate certain people and disseminate false information. Founding of restaurants in America experienced sharp decline when one of the web users revealed a false statistic that 90 percent of new-born restaurants go bankrupt in their first years. Words undoubtedly exercise huge power on people. Anonymity often incapacitates people's conscience, and thus, produces great amount of forged information.
     As a student attending KMLA, I am very much complacent about the status quo where freedom of speech is guaranteed. However, even if I were a highschool student in America, I would not have joined Moore's movement since it is not truly aiming for genuine democracy, and because the validity of information posted in the website is questionable.

[Possible Debate Motions]

1. THBT students have right to use school's privilege (without school's permission)
2. THW allow student protests
3. THBT people can use anonymous IDs in newspaper websites

My ideas on "The Story of Stuff"

     Last year, I was preparing for a group presentation at school and found out an interesting report about the relationship between TV advertisements on junk food and childhood obesity published by the Institute Of Medicine (IOM). The research team discovered that television advertising strongly influences what children under 12 eat. J. McGinnis, a senior scholar at IOM, said “The foods advertised are predominantly high in calories and low in nutrition — the sort of diet that puts children’s long-term health at risk”. I could not forget this alarming truth and from then, my whole diet changed; I stopped eating junk food.     
     While I was watching "The Story of Stuff", I had in my mind that this video will strongly influence minds of most of children who watch it, as the report by IOM affected my mine. Such an astonishing, yet fearful claim that we are buying toxic products and that every product comes along with toxins must have huge impact upon the fragile minds of children. It would not be a really big problem, however, if all the statistics and descriptions in this video were true; yet, they are not. Such exaggerations as pillows being soaked into toxic chemicals are very likely to give false recognition to people, especially children.
     Thus, 'The Story of Stuff' should not be used as an educational material. It contains exaggerated and forged pieces of information that is certainly not educational, for a proper education must derive its contents from facts. In addition, the video is too much obsessed with condemning the current production and consumption cycle that it does not show the whole part of the nation's industry. For instance, there are numerous eco-friendly corporations in United States and the U.S. government is trying to regulate the pollution from corporations by enacting legislations and implementing CER (Certified Emissino Reduction) policy.
     I donot deny that there are problems in the production and consumption cycle. However, if the problem is to be taught to children, it must be more truth-based and properly stated. Visual materials have huge influence on children's thoughts. An educational video would be more rational that to be radical.

The debate motions that I suggest are:

1. THBT government can restrict freedom of speech when the criticism against government is not truthful
2. THBT government should mandate companies to produce nutritious food when it comes to children-targeted products.
3. THBT United States' helping development of under-developed countries should be stopped