Schultze: Chapter 12: Communicators for God

This was my favorite chapter I have read all semester. The imagery Schultze uses about all of us being a part of Christ's orchestra was really an awesome image. As the conductor, God is directing us; presenting us with, or taking away opportunities, leading us down our path, and creating or taking away relationships that will help or hurt us.


We have the responsibility then, to make our song the best song.


We need to sing, we need to play, we need to dance for Christ.


I want to live my life the way my conductor wanted me to. I want to please him. I want to make him proud. I was blessed with the gift of writing. I want to use this gift to promote Him. I want to write to create justice, peace, and authenticity. I want to create change, spark hope, and motivate others.


I want to use my gifts the Lord has given me, and the skill sets I have learned through school and work, and live my life to the fullest.


And I will.


I feel so encouraged by the conclusion to Schultze's text. I do not want to be one of the people who tries to write their own score in the song. I trust God and know he has a plan for me (Jeremiah 29:11).


I am excited to use, or to continue using, the gifts I have been blessed with. What will you do with yours?

Schultze: Chapter 11: Christian Virtue

This chapter highlights authentic communication by means of peace, justice, authenticity, and civility. On page 154, Schultze uses the example of the Michael Jordan ad campaign, writing that the goal of the campaign was to truthfully highlight Jordan's talent, instead of hyping it up to sell Jordan's image or feed his ego.


Schultze writes, "Professional communicators often sacrifice authenticity in favor of status, money, and ego (154)."


What a true statement!


It seems as if ad campaigns everywhere are using methods to sell to their audience that sacrifice their authenticity.


For example, so many magazines, movies, and TV shows use sex and sexiness to sell their product, image, or label. Print advertisements are so played up it is hard to grasp whether it is a "real-life" situation or not. Many advertisements may display very intense or dramatic scenes, none of which are applicable to most people. 


For instance, this situation used in this ad is probably not applicable or authentic to most women:

(counterfeitchic.com)

This advertisement goes against the four main principles Schultze discusses. It is not authentic, it is not promoting justice, peace, and it is not forming civility.

One ad campaign, similiar to the Michael Jordan example, strives to remain authentic, promote civility, peace and justice. This is the Dove: True Beauty campaign.

Here, the company takes real women, real stories and real situations and uses them to sell the idea that we are all created perfect and beautiful.

I think the message the True Beauty campaign is issuing is a perfect example of good advertisement. Dove does not appear to be using this angle to create a bigger ego or status, or bring a large amount of money. It appears the campaign is done with good intentions. A change I appreciate. :)

True Beauty Ad

What do you think about authentic communication in advertisements? Does it work, or is our society too focused on unreal, stretched, or dramatized images?

Johannesen: Chapter 12: Intercultural and Multicultural Communication

In this chapter, Johannesen not only explains the definitions of intercultural and multicultural communication, he also gives various perspectives on different perspectives within this realm.

I think the most interesting part of this section is found in the section "The Golden Rule." I had no idea so many different religions have this rule. The "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" rule is found in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, Zoroastrianism and Jainism.

I have not even heard of some of those religions, in written in their own way, each has the basic concept of "The Golden Rule" integrated into their religious practices.

If only people would pay attention to, and implement this rule.

Think of how many lives would be saved, feelings would be spared, and injustices would not exist if people would follow this rule?

Although I strive to implement this rule, there is a large majority of people who do not. Think of terrorist groups, hate groups, gangs, and similar people.

 A major example would be the Holocaust during WWII. Would Hitler want the Jews killing him, his family, friends, and followers? Obviously not. By the "Golden Rule" there is no justification then for Hitler acting towards the Jews and other groups, as he did.

In the same way, the attacks on 9/11 killed thousands of people. Would the groups responsible for these attacks rather we did it to them? Or if we were to do something comparable?

Instead of hurting others, breaking them down, or taking their lives, why can't we treat people with respect, love, and compassion?

As Christians, this is one of our responsibilities. Treating others the way we want to be treated, and acting as a light for those in the dark, uncommitted to a life with Christ.

What makes it click for some people though? Why is this rule in so many religions, yet fails to be followed in such drastic examples?

What do you think? Is it ignorance? Is it that people feel that their actions are just? What can we do to stop this behavior, without falling into retaliation thinking?

What do you do when you feel angry with someone? Instead of retaliating, how do you calm yourself down or take the "high road?"

Schultze: Chapter 9: Prophet, Priest or Demon?

In this chapter of the text, Schultze analysizes mass media in four main sections, including creating myths, priestly propaganda, demonizing our neighbor, and finding prophetic media voices. On page 124, Schultze comments on storytelling contexts. From what used to be storiest old by mouth around a fire or around the dinner table, has converted to stories told online via the Internet, magazines, television, and radio.

I have grown up going to my family's lake house near Eugene, Oregon. While there, we do various activities, but nothing compares to our time spent as a family (my whole Dad's side), circled around the campfire in our chairs, and talking until the moon is high in the sky and the fire has burned down to coals.

We share and hear stories from our personal lives, stories from growing up, and stories from my grandfather's adventures. It is time I cherish, and look forward to it every year.

On a recent trip to the lake, my uncle loaded up the car with David, five of our cousins, and myself and headed down the road to find blackberries. One of my cousins, Joey, brought along his Ninendto DS. When my uncle saw Joey was playing on it, my uncle told him we were going on an adventure, and electronics were not to be used.

I admire him for saying that.

Media and electronic devices that can access the Internet and such distract us. They take us away from playing outside, reading books, and enjoying the company of our families and friends. I love the accessibility of the Internet, but interpersonal relationships that are NOT online are more important to me.

Schultze goes on to say mass media, and the stories shared within the mass media realm, reflect how and what we believe.

Is this true all of the time? Of course not. But our society has become obsessed with learning the latest celebrity gossip, the new scandles, and the newest break-ups or hook-ups. We look at the media for guidance on what to wear, how to talk, how to walk, and how to act.

Schultze implies our society views these celebrities as saints.

When was it okay, as Christians, to devote so much time watching, reading, listening to, or acting like these people? Shouldn't our time be spent pouring over the pages of our Bible, serving others, and sharing the Word?

Media is not bad, and I will be the first to admit, I enjoy reading magazines and keeping up with Hollywood. However, the problem comes when my, or our priorities shift and God becomes second in our lives.

Where does God fall in your list of priorities? Are there areas you should cut back to make room for Him?

Schultze: Chapter 8: The Role of Media

Media is an interesting thing. With such a large grip over media consumers, the media has the ability to shape our thoughts, beliefs, actions, and opinions over things.

In the eighth chapter of Schutlze's text, he writes about media and it's role in creating consumer-based products idolatry of media. One example he uses is that contemporary Christian music styles in the church is an inappropriate way to worship, according to some traditional Christians and churches.

While I am familiar with this ideology, I have also heard that some Christian churches believe that media, in some situations, is inappropriate as well, as it does not align in the way God intended worship to be.

In both cases, however, I disagree. I find it easiest to engage at church with music that is more from my era, with an exciting mix of drums, guitar, keyboard and vocals. In my past experiences at a small church in Gresham, the church sang only hymns and an elderly woman played the organ. That was all. No drums, no upbeat modern song, merely an organ and the voices of those in the congregation.

In that specific church in Gresham, I felt disconnected not only because the music was unfamiliar to me, but also because we read from hymn books. I like having Powerpoint slides with lyrics, or videos demonstrating what the pastor is speaking about. Technology is useful, it is available, and it helps people connect. Times are changing and although it may not be the specific way Christ intended us to worship him, it is a form of modern worship regardless. Worship is worship, no matter if it is using technology and upbeat music or not.

Do you agree or disagree? How different would church services be now if we only used the traditional forms of worship (no media and no modern music)? Do you think attendance for church services would increase, decrease, or stay the same?

Schultze: Chapter 7: Symbolic Power

Symbols are all around us. No doubt you will recognize what these symbols stand for...

Facebook: 39704-1287490872.gif

Twitter: mediaups.com

Target: thescene.com.au

Apple: http://www.obsessable.com/feature/pumpkin-carving-101-the-tools-of-the-trade/

Nike: ashwellgolf.co.uk

One of the most powerful videos demonstrating symbols comes from the movie Supersize Me. Here, Morgan Spurlock asks young boys and girls to identify different things based on symbols he holds up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpRQhVd63Y8&feature=related


It's shocking and disturbing to me. The youth in this tape can recognize Ronald McDonald almost immediately, but when it comes to Jesus they are stumped.


Oh. My. Gosh.


In chapter 7, Schultze investigates the power symbols have over us. These symbols and products behind the symbols are often controlling our lives in one way or another. For example for me, I work at Target. As I write this post I have my email, Facebook, and Twitter pages open. I am plugged into these products, and therefore, their symbolic and products are successfully pulling me in.


Schultze said something on page 105 that most people can sing advertisement jingles but cannot recite the Ten Commandments. As Christians, shouldn't it be the other way around? Schultze suggests that we should communicate the way Christ did by downward mobility (reaching out to those in need), and symbolic generosity (sharing our communication gifts with others), but how can we do that if we are so absorbed in different symbols?


As a journalist, I have the power to connect to those in need and share my gifts of writing if I use my writing gifts to please God. I can write about the good things happening in the world. I can write about the positive sides of negative stories. i can write to inspire, to change, and bring people to action.


I can even use these symbols, and other symbols in my life to do so. I can blog. I can update my statuses to share the Word. I can demonstrate my Christian beliefs through my actions and attitudes at work. I can do my part to keep the Word relevant, in a world where symbols are all around us. 


How will you do your part? 

Johannesen: Chapter 9 Communication in Organizations

When I think of culture, many times cultural pieces such as ethnicity, language, dress, mannerisms and style of speech. While these pieces are part of the cultural puzzle, culture also applies to different organizations, and ethically these organizations have codes to follow as well.


Target is an organization I have worked for for roughly two and a half years. While there, the organizational culture, and the way communication works throughout the Target corporation has been revealed to me.


One main cultural pieces of Target is the idea of being "Fun, Fast, and Friendly." Our culture, and this motto, means that we must complete our work and remain fun, fast, and friendly to both guests and our fellow co-workers. Within this culture of Target, we are also known for various other items, which help create the overall culture of Target stores. These include:

• Layout among regular Target stores, as well as Super Targets, are almost all the same, although Super Target stores have a produce and grocery section that may differ than regular stores
• Training for employees are the same among stores also, helping to create that overall culture. A person trained here in Oregon is going to be the same as the training found in stores across the nation
• Red and Khaki: Brand is important to Target’s culture and Target employees in all Target stores help make that culture known by wearing Red and Khaki and following the policies and practices of Target.
• The consistency with having the shelves stocked and the store clean is another part that helps define the culture of Target since it is consistent across store
• Commericals and print advertisements are also consistent from one week to another, allowing guests an easy way to identify the commericals and the culture at Target.

Target also has specific subcultures and counter cultures it relates to:

• Subcultures: There are examples of subcultures found within a Target store. These include the different departments such as Electronics, Sporting Goods, Furniture, Ready to Wear, and so on. These subcultures include a group of people who specialize in that area and create a subculture with experiences and knowledge shared amongst that group.
• Some major counter cultures of Target include Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Fred Meyers, K-Mart and even Costco. By keeping an eye on the competitors and their cultures, Target will know what adjustments their stores can make (prices, practices, policies and so on) to ensure their guests have the best shopping experience possible in the unique and fun culture Target is known for. These counter cultures also allow Target the opportunity to tell what it is doing well as a company. This may be offering the lowest prices, best service or return policy, and biggest product line in comparison to these other stores and their cultures.

Together, each of these pieces create the complex culture at Target. It is not just one single thing that creates the Target culture.


However, within the culture of Target, there is a level of integrity that employees must follow to for Target to remain a successful culture. For example, recently a fellow employee I knew was fired for stealing from the company. I could not believe it! Who would do such a thing, especially someone who is familiar with the high level of security within our store?


Target HR representatives handled the situational well, following "The Model of Organizational Integrity" (Julie Belle White and Doug Wallace, p. 161-162). Target solved ethical problems directly and reflectively by meeting with the employee discretely and promptly following his ethical violation (the stealing). The situation was dealt directly and involved only the necessary people so it was not a store-wide dramatic event. The HR department was responsive and responsible in the way they handled the situation, which helped the entire process run smoothly.


The second section of the organization integrity says organizations must interact responsibly. As mentioned above, Target was responsible by only involving those who were necessary in the situation such as security and a corporate representative. Furthermore, Target was acting to promote peace and justice, while remaining sensitive to the employee's privacy.


The third habit says to model integrity. As I understand, integrity means doing the right thing, even if no one is looking. This is the ethical code the employee violated. He took advantage of his position and stole from the company he worked for. He did not do the right thing, and in turn, he suffered the consequences of his actions. Target followed their ethical code by dealing with the integrity violation. If they had just passed it by, without drawing attention to the situation, they too would have been violating ethical codes. Luckily, Target handled the situation and did what was necessary in this specific case.


The fourth habit says an organization should share purposes and directions. The goal of Target, simply put, is to be the best store by offering the lowest prices, best customer service, product availability and so on. By not allowing the employee to keep his job will help maintain the goal of Target: to be the best. If a company cannot trust the employees working within it, there is no way the company can be the best.


That being said, the fifth and sixth habits, valuing stakeholder perspectives and practicing personal integrity must take place. If every employee acts responsibly, and strives to maintain the "fun, fast, and friendly" attitude, situations like this can be avoided.


Johannesen also comments that using nondestructive communication such as slang, aggressive or abusive language and so on. I have noticed at times I will adjust my language depending on who I am talking to. For example, I might use slang or less formal language if dealing with people my age. If working with older adults or elderly people, I will be more professional and formal. However, I would NEVER use curse words, racist remarks or labels to refer to people. 


Language and commuication within organizations can be tricky for some; however, in a culture such as Target where it remains fun while professional, it is easy to fit in. As long as we don't steal.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WyajAgP0xB8/ShbczDd6ryI/AAAAAAAAAFg/fgKiRE34RWQ/S240/bullseye.png&imgrefurl=http://fastfunfriendly20.blogspot.com/&usg=__TSfHx0f0bsYUCrKhVjs5cherItk=&h=213&w=210&sz=29&hl=en&start=18&zoom=1&tbnid=0ECwD-CzhgkH9M:&tbnh=106&tbnw=105&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtarget%2Bfun%2Bfast%2Band%2Bfriendly%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Den%26biw%3D1281%26bih%3D615%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1

Johannesen Chapter 8: Interpersonal, Communication and Small Group Discussion

Interpersonal communication, or small group communication makes me laugh. Has anyone else seen someone walking down the street for example, that you just want to avoid? I have done this before. I have even gone as far to change my normal walking route around school, just to avoid certain people.

I am not doing this to be rude, but some people can be awkward to talk to, silent, or maybe the opposite. Maybe they are loud, talk too much, or say random things.

In chapter 8, Johannesen quotes philosopher H. P Grice with his ethics for everyday conversation. Grice says that the four main types of ethical guidelines for conversations include:

• Quanitity: presenting as much information that is required without saying too much
• Quality: only speaking in truth and saying things that have evidential support
• Relation: making sure what we say makes sense in the context of conversation
• Manner: being brief, to the point, and avoiding intentional ambiguity

With certain people, they may violate one or more of these ethical codes. For example, for the person who talks too much or talks about unrelated topics, he or she would be violating the relation and manner ethical codes.

But what about me. Surely, I violate these codes sometimes as well. Have you ever been in a situation (I certainly have), where you have a really good point or thing to say, but unfortunately the conversation has moved on. Instead of letting the topic go, you throw it out there? Sometimes it gets the conversation back on track, other times, it just confuses people.

Has this ever happened to you?

Or has the opposite happened? Have you dealt with people who just don't carry conversation well?

Two nights ago, David and I came home to the fire department outside our apartment. Going up to someone to ask what had happened, the woman looked up, said someone's cooking caused the smoke alarms to go off, and we were waiting for the "all clear." While David returned to the car for a moment, I tried to make small talk with the woman by introducing David and myself. In response, she was texting the entire time, and only looked up to say, "I'm Heather."

It was an uncomfortable and awkward situation. I tried to make small talk, be friendly towards a neighbor we had not met, but instead, she looked down at her phone the whole time.

In our case, Heather was demonstrating "topical avoidance" according to Stanley Deetz (141-143). Topical avoidance meant she was avoiding the topic by being unwilling to talk about her emotions and perceptions over the event.

Has normal face-to-face communication between people, or meeting people in a face-to-face place been replaced by social networking and meeting people over the Internet?

Will face-to-face communication eventually be nonexistent? Does the Internet have that much control over us, or will it someday?

Johannessen Chapter 7: Some Basic Issues

Continuing on the topic of ethics, Johannnessen has a section on Internet Ethics towards the end of the chapter. What a fascinating topic.


The Internet is extremely powerful. Once something is published, it will forever remain in Cyberspace and may be accessed by tens, hundreds, thousands, or millions of people! 


As technology continues to improve and change the way we do things, an ethical code for the Internet needs to be established.


But since technology and the Internet is growing and changing so rapidly, is there a way to create a somewhat standard set of ethical guidelines?


On page 125, Johannessen quotes Thomas Cooper with these ethical issues

• Dehumanization: this is especially relevant in chat rooms, or in a feedback post to a news article or something similar. All to often chat rooms, comment streams and video replies are answered in a rude, immature, ignorant or hurtful way. I am not going to post specific examples, but look around. You'll find an example soon enough.
• Deception: the issue of deception is big on the Internet too. I used to use a fake name to protect myself from anyone with bad intentions online. Gradually, I have allowed myself to reveal my name and such, but things such as my year of birth go unsaid. Does that mean I am lying? Am I breaking a commandment? Or am I just protecting myself?
• Personal Privacy: See above. How much is too much to reveal? How little is too little?
• Fair and equal opportunity: people can access the Internet almost 24/7 from anywhere, thanks to wireless and Wi-Fi connectable phones, mp3 players, and so on. But what happens when people use the Internet so much it consumes them? What about Second Life? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3d_fqDcN1s

Is Second Life ethical? What do you think? I personally don't like the idea of Second Life, nor do I ever want to use it, but many people use it for classroom lectures, for shopping, and for recreation. But is creating an alias on Second Life, or similar sites considered deception?


Are Internet ethics going to be along the same lines as the ethics in written or spoke communication? Hmm...