Advertising Strategies

After reading the articles about viral advertising, I was pretty shocked at how affective it actually is. However, it has always been said that the fastest and most effective way to spread news is through word of mouth, so in that case I shouldn't be so taken aback. Since word of mouth is the most effective way to spread news, it makes sense to use viral advertising to help promote a product; the more the product is talked about, the better the product does. I don't think there are only certain products that viral advertising will or will not work for, but rather it will be more effective for products with "attention grabbing" ads. If a product or company has an over-the-top commercial, a powerful message, or even an ad that leaves consumers feeling confused ;people are more likely to talk about it. If the ad campaign of the company or product is just a normal average Joe commercial, people are likely to ignore it and talk about the interesting ones with their friends, families, or coworkers. Great examples of successful viral advertising are Dove's Onslaught and Burger King's subservient chicken. After reading a blog on unitstep.net titled "Dove and Viral Marketing," a few good points are made on how viral advertising truly does benefit a company, whether the opinions on the ad are positive or negative. This blog argues that first, people are watching the Dove ad willingly on youtube.com, and because of this are more likely to share it with others whether they support it or not. Also, having the video on YouTube allowed others to make parodies of the video, which in turn produce extra, free publicity for Dove.

After watching both the subservient chicken and Dove's Onslaught, I definitely have a stronger opinion about both products. If i would not have known that Dove was owned by the same company as Axe, I would have thought that the ad was great, and probably would have even considered buying the products from the store to feel like I'm helping to support the cause. However, since I read the article about the connection between Dove and Axe, I am less likely. I will still use Dove products and support them, as the company is so large that the two separate divisions may not know or care what the other is doing. But either way, the as evoked an emotion in me, and I actually told many of my friends about it; proving that viral advertising works. As for the subservient chicken, I thought the website was dumb and unrelated to the specific food Burger King was trying to promote. But nonetheless, even though I was not a fan of the site, I told others about it, which is giving Burger King more publicity. Also, the ad does not make me want to buy Burger King more than before, but if I was at the restaurant I may remember the ad and think to order the chicken strips it was promoting. Overall I thought both ads helped the companies, as both good and bad opinions are talked about and shared, and give the companies publicity and attention either way.

My advice to advertising executives looking to reach the 18-24 marketing segment is definitely to use the Internet in one way or another. However, I believe that YouTube is probably the best way to reach this group as teens especially are watching and sharing numerous videos everyday. When looking online in general, whether I'm shopping or watching a TV show on Mtv.com, there is always a button below the video which you can click to share with a friend. This is smart idea as you may forget to tell a friend after watching the show, so this way the link can be sent right away. Overall I believe the Internet is a great way to use viral advertising and produce publicity for the product or company. Every friend of mine uses the Internet on a daily basis for a variety of things, making it the easiest way for young adults to and share ads with others.

Movie Ratings

Seeing various movies over Thanksgiving weekend caused me to think back to the movie chapter and lecture of class, and led me to blog about the pros and cons of the movie rating system. I believe the current rating system, updated in 1990, is still an issue of controversy, as it has been since first established in 1968. Today the current rating system stands as: NC-17 (no children under 17 should be admitted),R(restricted for anyone under age 17 unless accompanied by an adult), PG-13(parental guidance suggested for children under 13), PG( parental guidance- may be unsuitable for children under 13), and G(suitable for general audiences and all ages). From a far this system appears to be a great working solution, but really I believe that there are both major pros and cons to the system.

I think a major pro of the rating system is that it shifted from censoring the content of movies, to simply notifying the public of how graphic or violent a movie is. The industry should not be limited to the type of content they are allowed to use in movies, but should warn people about what may be seen in the movie. The warning then puts the problem into the hands of the public; if a person is appalled by the violent content of the movie, it was ultimately their decision to watch the movie, knowing that their is indeed violence present. The system is also a great way for parents to know which movies are appropriate for their children to go see. We have learned in an earlier chapter that violent television shows and movies can lead children to imitate the behavior and act out violently. With a rating system, parents can take their children to family flicks and not worry about there being a negative influence.

However, although the idea of a rating system is good in theory, and a good rule of thumb in which movies children should stay away from; I don't believe that it is totally effective. First off, although the ratings are supposed to tell which movies are appropriate for a certain age, it is pretty subjective. One person in the United States may find the amount of violence and profanity in a PG-13 rated movie to be innapropriate for teenagers, and believe it should instead be rated R. In contrast, another person may believe the same movie isn't violent at all, and allow their 9 year old child to view it. Another con of the movie rating system is the enforcement of the ratings, especially when it comes to those movies that are rated R. Although all theaters are supposed to check ID's of younger movie-goers, to assure no one under the age of seventeen is admitted without an adult present; many aren't. I can speak from experience, as when me and my friends were under seventeen, we had no problem getting into many R rated movies. Even if ID's are being checked where tickets are being bought, teens find their way around it by buying tickets to a different movie, and sneak in to the R rated one. Is there a way to get past this problem? I personally believe that their are bigger issues to be concerned about, but more strict enforcement could definetely be put into place. For example, one movie theater near my hometown checks all ID's for rated R movies, no matter the age of the ticket purchaser. Also, they usually have an employee standing outside of the entrance to the R rated movie, and only those with a ticket to that specific movie are let in. this in turn prevents teens from sneaking in to these R rated flicks. On the downside, checking IDs causes long lines and potentially angry customers. So is it really worth it?

In addition, I was recently reading an article on backstage.com titled "MPAA to Offer Full Disclosure on Ratings" which eluded to a few changes that will be made to the rating system. Although nothing drastic such as a new letter will be added to the system, there are plans to increase the effort put into explaining the ratings system to filmakers as well as the public. The newest addition is a weekly email known as the "Red Carpet Ratings System," listing films, their ratings, and reasons for the given ratings. I believe this is a good step to help the public become more aware of what they are allowing their children to watch, and be more cautious about it in the future. I don't think it will cause any changes in the amount of underage kids and teens getting into R rated movies, but it definetely can't hurt to keep the public more informed on an issue that many people today disregard.

The Current Evolution of Facebook

Facebook, a social networking site started by Mark Zuckerberg, has made great strides from its birth in 2004 to its current status today. Starting out as a site solely for college students to network and gain friends, the site has evolved greatly and now allows anyone to be a part of their school network, work network, or geographical network. However, besides simply allowing a greater variety of people to take part in the site, I believe that Facebook has also become more business savvy in recent years. Will this new venture benefit the ever-evolving social network, or cause members to shy away from the ad-covered web pages?

When Facebook first began I believe that Zuckerberg truly had the users of the site in mind, with the money he was beginning to make serving as an extra perk. But recently, with Facebook's blatant popularity, I have noticed a shift in focus towards business and promotion of brands through ads on the site. When I first started my personal Facebook page in high school, there were few ads, and the only things a user was allowed to do was write on a friends "wall,"post photos, and list there general interests and educational information. However, Facebook now offers thousands of new applications which allow users to do anything from sport their loyalty to a sporting team, to give a "gift" to a friend. Another recent development i noticed was the amount of advertising on Facebook. From the banner ads on the side of the page, to companies being able to create their own pages to promote their products. According to an article on CNN.com, Facebook is going above and beyond by unveiling a new ad campaign to include Facebook users. They say that people influence people, and this new campaign will do just that. If a friend buys a product or books a vacation, the company will be able to use this information to entice others within their social network to buy the product.

I believe Facebook is becoming to commercial, and has lost much of its luster since it first began. I now feel like I am being used by the site to help make money through this new advertising plan, and I am not a fan. I think this idea will backfire on Facebook and cause many privacy issues to arrive. What if a member doesn't want their information used on a companies Facebook page? Will they have the choice to say no? It will be interesting to see what becomes of this new investment, and how it will affect the popularity of the site. Personally, although I do not like the idea of being used to help advertisers, I will continue to use this social networking site to keep in contact with my friends. I have learned to adapt to all changes the site has enforced thus far, and use the site far to often to quit cold-turkey. But in the end I think the new additions to Facebook are taking the focus away from the needs of the users, and putting it on to business and making money; a common problem plaguing many Internet sites today.

Minnpost.com

Upon visiting the site for Minnpost.com, I was slightly confused as to what was supposed to be so special about it. To try to find an answer I began to read the section of the site that describes what Minnpost.com is all about. Upon reading the excerpt describing the intentions of this new local online news site, I discovered that there were indeed a few qualities that separated Minnpost.com from the rest. First, I found it interesting that Minnpost.com is run by a non-profit journalism group(Minnpost), and that the funding was provided by four families, as well as other supporters. This stood out too me, as I don't believe that many local news sites today with such great reliability and validity are non-profit. It definitely causes me to wonder whether or not it will be able to compete with corporate business models who are working for a profit. But since the site was launched only recently, November 8, 2007, only time will tell.

After browsing the site for fifteen to twenty minutes, I concluded that I will definitely make an effort to include Minnpost.com into my daily news diet. A big plus of the site is how they mentioned in their "about Minnpost.com" page that they will not try to spread themselves out too far, and focus on supplying news to "news-intense people who care about Minnesota". I think this is a very important aspect, as many news pages try to please everyone, and in doing so they don't put enough focus on any one area. I also like how the site seems to offer several different opinions and views on subjects, showing that they care about sharing opinions from every side of the story and are not biased. Last, I will include this in my daily news consumption because the site is simple. There are no ads flashing in your face, or links trying to get you to visit several different sites, which is always a plus.

I do believe that Minnpost.com will be able to compete with corporate, for-profit business models once the site really gets off the ground. From the looks of it, the site has the resources, journalists, as well as a print edition of Minnpost to work to its advantage. If they are able to get their name out to the people of Minnesota, especially through word of mouth, they should be able to obtain a large group of loyal readers.

Last, as I said before, one of the great things about this page is how simple it is. Unlike Startribune.com which is busy, and offers a plethora of advertisements as well as advertisement links. Also, I believe Minnpost.com will be able to offer a greater variety of opinions on stories, and stick to focusing on the people of Minnesota, where the Star Tribune may try to spread there focus to other areas of the nation. Overall I believe that there are many positives for Minnpost.com, and if they are able to compete with larger, for-profit news sites, that it will grow to be something very successful in the future.

Whose News?

When it comes to the topic of television news I usually choose local news programs on broadcast television. I prefer these over cable news programs, as they report on local happenings as well as bigger issues occurring in the nation. In my opinion, local news appears to truly care about the issues that they are reporting on, while programs such as CNN news come across as only caring about being the first to cover the story, and broadcast it out to as many people as possible. However, when it comes to reading news on the internet I like to visit both local and network stations. For local news I usually prefer reading about the news in my hometown, Milwaukee, and therefore visit the website for TMJ4, which is an affiliate of NBC. I prefer this local site over the other local stations in Milwaukee, as it is the station my family usually has on at home and also, I believe their website is set up in a better manner, and is very easy to navigate around, in comparison to other stations. When I want more information on a larger issue, affecting a different part of the country, I usually turn to CNN as they clearly post links leading to the latest stories, and always have reliable information.

Television news is beneficial as it can cut away from television programs to give breaking news, which other mediums, such as newspapers, aren't able to report the story until the next morning. Television is also constantly on in many American homes, so it is easier for families to receive their news at home, on television, opposed to in the car, where kids may want to listen to music, Ipods, etc. Television news also offers a variety of local and national network news programs to choose from. If you do not like the way in which a certain station is reporting a story, a different station is only a few clicks away. A drawback to television news is that local stations only show news at certain hours of the day, so if you miss any of those news broadcasts, you may have to turn to a different medium, such as the internet, which is always showing the latest news stories, weather, sports scores, etc.

I do not necessarily believe that any one network does a better job than the others. I think that everyone has their own preference about which station they think does a better job, and has a station that they choose to watch daily, but in my opinion, all four do a fine job. Even though I prefer to watch a local network, affiliated with NBC, it is because I am accustomed to the anchors and setup of the newscast. But from a news standpoint, as long as all networks are providing the latest news in an unbiased fashion, it is hard for me to say that one does a better job over another.

Overall, as I stated previously, I choose to watch local networks over national networks. The setup of a local station's newscast are easier to follow, as many national networks have banners flashing at the bottom of the screen, and are cutting back and forth between multiple stories at the same time. If I do want to read about national issues I usually use a national network's website, as you can choose the stories you want to read, when you want to read them. In my opinion i believe it is better if a local station is affiliated with a national network, as the news seems to be more reliable. The local station I watch in Milwaukee is affiliated with NBC. I think that the affiliation with NBC itself is not important, since I find any of the other national networks( FOX, ABC,CBS)to be just as reliable. The only important factor is that the station is indeed affiliated with a national network. If it wasn't I do not think that I would trust the news being reported as much as I would from a different local station who did have an affiliation. Since national networks have many reporters, constantly researching stories, it is easier to trust a local station who is directly receiving this information than a local station with no affiliation.

The Ratings

After reading chapter nine,"Television," in the textbook, I decided to write a blog about the ratings system. First, I found it very interesting how there were actually two aspects of the rating system. According to Mass Media in a Changing World, these aspects are the rating and the share. The rating is the percentage of all homes with televisions that are on at a certain time of day and tuned to a particular station, where a share is the percentage of homes which the television is in use, and on a certain station. Since the ratings take their data from all homes with a television, whether it is turned on or not, the ratings number is usually smaller than the share number.

While reading the section on ratings I wondered what types of programs were the most popular in America, today. In order to find the answers, i turned to the resources of the most recognized rating company, Nielsen Media Research. While reading about the Nielsen system in the textbook, I thought it was very interesting how the ratings data is collected. The basic idea is that meters are installed in the television sets of 10,000 randomly chosen households, to monitor which stations are being viewed at any hour of the day. The system is also equipped with a device also detects which member of the family is watching the station through a system close to that of a time clock. They let the device know when they start viewing, and again when they are done.

After grasping the main idea of how the concept worked, i looked to the Nielsen Media Research website to obtain the ratings for both broadcast television, as well as cable television for the week of October 15,2007. According to the results for broadcast television the top five were:CSI, Dancing With the Stars, Grey's Anatomy, FOX MLB ALCS Game 7, and Dancing With the Stars(the results show). After looking at the top five I thought it made sense, as it was a mixture of reality television, mystery, drama, and sports. Also, I think it is worthy to note that half of the top ten shows are shown on ABC, four on CBS, and only one on FOX. I believe this probably gives great insight to stations on what types of shows they should be airing for more viewers, as well as advertisers who may be trying to decide on what time of day, as well as what station they are going to advertise on. Besides broadcast television, I was also curious to find the results for cable television. The top five programs for the week of October 15, 2007 being: NFL Regular Season L(Giants/Falcons), Hannah Montana,Law & Order:CI(Orig), College Ftbl-Sat Prime L(Auburn/LSU), and Wizards of Waverly Place. These ratings were interesting to me as two of the top five were football games, two were children's programs, and only one was a drama.

Also, three stations dominated the top ten: USA, ESPN, and Disney. This really gives insight into which programs households are truly interested in viewing in society today.
From these results I also found it easy to see why there is controversy over the Nielsen Media Research rating system today. Many are concerned with the fact that these ratings are only taken from households and do not take into account dorm rooms, bars, or hotels, all places of high viewing. If these were taken into account the four of the top ten rated programs on cable may have been something besides children's shows on the Disney Channel.

Overall, I believe the Nielsen rating system is beneficial for a television station's success, as well as serving the interests of advertisers. However, the system should be extended to other building including: college dorms, bars, and hotels, to get a true measure of which programs and stations are the most watched in America.

Radio

Although I do listen to the radio, the only time i really do so is when I am in the car. Other than that I always listen to my Ipod or Itunes on my computer. One reason is because i don't have a radio in my dorm room, and although you can now listen to many stations through the Internet, I usually prefer to choose the songs I want to listen to. Even when I am in the car the only stations I listen to are those that play music, and even then I have a select three or four that I listen to on a constant basis. These stations usually play more current music from today, or as early as the 90s, other than that I usually do not listen to any other radio stations. I could listen to AM news stations or radio talk shows, but I always can get my news from other sources, and listening to the radio when I am driving is what gets me energized, especially if I am driving to work. In fact, the station I listen to the most back home in Milwaukee is called 103.7KISS FM because it plays the most current music and has a great morning show! Also, it is the one radio station whose website i visit, because as you can see from the homepage they always have fun videos and other random contests and announcements to see.

I have never personally chose to listen to National Public Radio, but have heard it while in the car with my dad or grandparents. I don't listen to it because I always get my news from other sources such as the television or newspaper, and enjoy the morning programs of my normal stations opposed to those on NPR. I feel as though NPR is directed more towards an older adult crowd, and that many teenagers don't know NPR exists or simply choose not to listen to it. I believe there are benefits from it, such as certain programs are specified at different interests that people may not be able to find on other mediums such as the television. Also, on certain shows you can hear people's opinions about subjects or happenings in the news, which isn't found anywhere else really. Overall, I think the concept of NPR is great, I just prefer to listen to music rather than talk radio.

Last, I do not believe that satellite radio is the answer. I feel it is good for people who like to listen to a certain type of music, or have options when it comes to radio shows, as Sirius and XM offer a variety of specialized stations. However, for me I don't think it is worth the money, since i would still listen to the same radio stations that I can get now for free. I would only pay for XM or Sirius if I was looking for a certain type of program or music station that could not be found on regular radio. If you have the money to spend on it, then it could be a good investment, but it would definitely not be a top priority. Also, another nice thing about satellite radio is the fact that it is commercial free. As for whether I would choose XM or Sirius, it would really come down to which one was cheaper per month, and which I would be getting the better deal for my interests and lifestyle. One package may come with more stations that I would want to listen to, where the other may only come with a few that fit my interests, and the rest I would never use. But overall I do not think I will be investing in satellite radio anytime soon, especially since the only time I ever listen to the radio is in my car, and I don't even have a car here at school.

Movie Downloading

While reading chapter 6 in the textbook about movies, I decided to write my blog this week about illegal movie downloading. Now known as pirating, the illegal copying and selling of movies, it is still a large problem facing studios today. File sharing programs make it so easy for a person to download a movie in a matter of seconds, new or old releases, and even movies that are still in theaters. I think that pirating movies is most popular with teenagers, and especially on college campuses. But why aren't teenagers, and even adults who participate in pirating, going to the theaters like they used to? In today's society I believe people do not have as much time to go see movies, as they are busy with school, work, and other activities on the weekends. But another great reason is the cost of movies. To buy a DVD, most prices range from $10-20, and to see a movie, prices are always on the rise ranging from $6-10 depending on age and the time of the showing. Instead of having to pay all of this money for two hours of pleasure,(not even, if the movie is bad), people are able to download a new movie and burn it onto their own DVD in less than 5 minutes. Besides the time convenience, downloading a movie is virtually free.
In fact, according to recent poll results shown in an article called "Pirate Movies no Big Deal Say Most Americans" on www.downloadsquad.com, 40% of Americans polled thought that downloading movies illegally was a serious offense. I don't think many Americans today realize how much money they are costing the business buy downloading these movies. Instead they believe that studios, actors, and theaters are all making more than enough money without them seeing or purchasing the movies.
Although the movie industry is trying to rid the world of those who illegally download movies, I don't think it will ever completely disappear. However, it can help reduce the numbers. According to the textbook, in 2003 the movie industry started to take a stand against the problem with advertisements to scare people from downloading, as well as encrypting DVDs, so people are not able to copy and share them. They also filed lawsuits against certain file sharing programs such as "Kazaa," but even so, new file sharing systems are created on a constant basis. It is like the music industry, although they shut down the biggest file sharing program "Napster," the problem is still occurring today through other programs.
I believe that if people continue to download movies, the business will have more money issues than they do at the moment. People are not realizing how big of a deal illegal downloading is, and wont unless they are prosecuted, which obviously cannot happen to everyone. Perhaps making a system such as making a system as highly publicized as I Tunes, where customers could download movies at a reasonable price, there would be a cut back in the number of illegal downloads. But until the industry figures out a plan, people will continue getting away with downloading these movies for free.

Magazines

Following professor Sander's media blog discussion idea, I have decided to blog about four different types of magazines: a consumer magazine, trade magazine, public relations magazine, and a miscellaneous magazine.

The first magazine is called Seventeen magazine, which is placed in the category of being a consumer magazine as it advertises and reports on issues dealing with lifestyle, as well as consumer products. those most likely to subscribe to this magazine are teenage girls, especially of ages 16-20. This is because issues of the magazine discuss the newest fashions for teen girls, makeup ideas, body issues, and the ever important advice for problems with boys. Even the websites homepage displays advertisements for Covergirl Cosmetics on the bottom, and links to health, beauty, and college tips at the top. Likely advertisers would be clothing companies, makeup companies such as Covergirl, hair product companies, or even ads for perfumes, or movies now on DVD that cater to the interests of teen girls. These are popular advertisements because teen girls are always looking for new products to try, or the latest clothes that will make them the most fashionable.Seventeen could put ads for their magazine in other magazines owned by the same company, such as Cosmo Girl, to cross promote the two. Also, other promotion strategies could be to put links to the Seventeen magazine website on other teenage related webpages. The publisher of this magazine is Hearst Communications, and is specifically part of the Hearst Teen Network, which publishes other teen magazines. Last, single copies of Seventeen magazine can be purchased in bookstores, grocery stores, gas stations, or even airports.

The second magazine I researched was a trade magazine called Midwest Real Estate News. This is a trade magazine as it focuses specifically on the real estate business, and is essential reading for Realtors in the Midwest, who would most likely be the main subscribers to this magazine. Advertisers in this magazine would generally include brokerage firms, construction or architecture companies, or any other companies that go hand-in-hand with the real estate business. Midwest Real Estate News could help promote the magazine by sending out a free sample issue to major real estate firms throughout the Midwest, or place advertisements in other publications Realtors may read. The Midwest Real Estate NewsSeventeen magazine, I did not know whether single copies of this magazine could be purchased, but if they are available I would assume they would be sold at a major bookstore that carries a variety of different kinds of magazines.

For my third magazine choice I chose PR Week magazine, which is categorized as one of the major public relations magazine. This magazine would cater to anyone with a job in the PR industry as it offers recent news, research studies, and techniques currently popular in the world of public relations. Advertisers in this magazine are most likely going to be for PR agencies, large corporations, or even companies advertising for PR job openings. These advertisements are most likely to be seen in PR Week magazine because they are the types of things most directly related to the world of PR, and it is a great way for companies to fill PR staff positions. PR Week magazine could be promoted by supplying PR agencies with sample copies, to persuade them to subscribe, or even placing links to their magazine's website on other PR related pages. The publisher of PR Week is Haymarket Media which also publishes other business, consumer, and medical publications. Last, when searching on their website I came across a single copy order form, but other than that I do not know whether single copies can be purchased in regular stores.

The last magazine I researched was Communication Law and Policy, which is classified as a miscellaneous magazine. Subscribers of this magazine are most likely people involved in the field of journalism, sociology, communications, business, or even attorneys and policy makers. This is because the magazine focuses on recent problems in the media dealing with the freedom of expression, and the first amendment. Advertisements in this magazine may be for law firms, or other publications dealing with similar issues, because people who are reading about law and policy may have media companies with legal problems who made need more information, or the help of a law firm. Communication Law and Policy seems like it would be harder to promote than the other magazines, but could be sent out to schools with journalism classes, media companies, or law offices to persuade them to subscribe. The publisher of this magazine is Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Online it states that "subscriptions are based on a calendar-year-basis only,"and I assume single copies are not available since the subscription price is higher than most magazines. The cost is $60 for individuals and $455 for institutions, and no replacement copies can be sent out, which makes me believe single copies are not sold of this magazine.

Overall it was interesting to analyze these aspects for four different types of magazines to see in which ways they were similar, as well as how they differed from one another. The advertising is always based on the target group reading the magazine, and all magazines could use some of the same approaches to promoting their magazines. All seem to have publishers that specialize in the area of interest in which the magazine covers, and single copies of the magazines were most likely to be issued for the most popular magazines, such as magazine is published by the Real Estate Publishing Group, who also publishes other news magazines for different regions of the United States. Unlike Seventeen.

"Not Just Kids Love 'High School Musical'"

When the movie "High School Musical" first appeared last summer on the Disney channel, I, along with many other Americans, thought it would be another cheesy movie for young children. However, no one knew how big of a hit "High School Musical" would actually become between 2006 and 2007. The movie took America by storm, and kids aren't the only ones singing along...
On September 29, 2007 I was browsing the MSNBC news website, when i came across an interesting article about "High School Musical's "popularity among kids as well as adults. I myself will admit that I have seen both "High School Musical"and "High School Musical 2" more than once.Now you may be asking, why is it so popular? Well, many say it's because of the good clean fun; no sex or violence. While at the same time, it is entertaining, humorous, and even a little romantic, which easily engages an older crowd. In this movie there is a multitude of cliques including: the jocks, the brains, and the rich kids, which are usually stereotyped to hate each other. Yet in the end of these two movies, the nerdy girl wins the heart of the jock, and everyone get along perfectly, singing and dancing to musical numbers including"We're All in This Together" as seen in this picture.
Reading this article made me think of how "High School Musical" has been present in all types of mass media lately. Even if you haven't seen the movie, there are songs from the movie on the radio, headlines on the Internet, and posters as well as other memorabilia in department stores. And not only is High School Musical on TV, but it is said that the third movie will be released in theaters, taking over yet another aspect of mass media. This article about the movie also made me think of an issue discussed in class, where companies will buy the rights to movies, such as "High School Musical "in order to make toys, clothes, school supplies, books, or any other objects based on the original. However, in this case Disney did not sell the rights to "High School Musical," aware of how much more money could be made off from other "High School Musical" objects.
Overall, I believe this movie was such a big hit because it was the first movie in a long time that can be enjoyed by all ages. Like the article mentioned, most shows and movies today are aimed at pleasing the adult taste buds; with violence, sex, and drama, not allowing families to enjoy much TV and movie time together anymore. Luckily, "High School Musical" saved the day, and I'm sure that its success, shown in all forms of media, will cause networks and production companies to produce more shows and movies that all ages can relate to and enjoy. This movie is just another example of how much of our lives are consumed by aspects of mass media, and the affects it can have on our lives.