Sunday, November 29, 2015

How Far Is Too Far?

Nowadays, it's not very difficult for police officials to trace phone calls, for example, in the case of a 911 call. But what happens when the authorities use cellphone tracking devices to absorb thousands of emails, phone calls and texts in one particular area? According to Clarence Walker's article, federal investigators and law enforcement agencies have now turned to StingRay technology to spy more freely on drug crime suspects.

The StingRay (pictured below) was originally manufactured by a German/ Britain based firm but have now partnered with US law enforcement agencies to spy on potential crime suspects. The device works by acting as a cell tower in order to tap into the suspect's phone conversations, and in doing so, also collects unsuspecting residents' conversations.

After being blocked by a Supreme Court ruling, law officials were not allowed to use GPS technology and eventually resorted to the StingRay. They now claim that even though they are able to listen to other conversations they are not violating any privacy rights and claim it is completely constitutional. Let's keep in mind that they do not issue warrants before tracking other people's calls and they do so with no consent..
How far is the government willing to go to "keep us safe?"



Time to "Chip in"

"Chipping in" is usually used to reference a person or group of people helping out a cause, this is exactly what companies such as Applied Digital Solutions plan to do.

But you know, by implanting an actual tracking chip in people.


The company's chip would ideally help all those suffering from medical conditions to cautious parents. The chip would be about the size of a grain of rice and would be located under a layer of skin in the person's hand. All personal information would be stored within the chip to make it more accessible in case of an emergency. Through the chip, hospitals would have access to the patient's allergies, insurance information, and overall medical history by the wave of a hand. By ridding patients of the common hospitalization nuisances, they would be able to solely focus on getting better. 

Now, parents would also benefit from this type of technology. By chipping their children they would be able to track them faster and efficiently if they were to go missing. The locating device would aid family members of Alzheimer patients to bring them home safely.

Undoubtedly, technology continues to improve to make everyday life easier, however, it doesn't come without its downsides. 

What if the government decided to do away with plastic identification cards and required chip implants instead? What would happen if a child were to be tracked by someone other than their parent? Or if all of our medical/ location information were to be hacked? 

Although the chip might seem like the answer to all of our security problems, no one can prevent others from abusing this technology to their advantage. So the question at hand is, would you be willing to "chip in?" 

How do you feel about "chipping in?" Take the survey here.
And for ABC News' article on Veri-chip technology click on this link.

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

50 Year Old Housewife

Chapter 8 Invitation to Insight

Question 1: The woman who sent out the postcard, disclosed the information in the form of catharsis disclosure. I came to this conclusion because the secret is pretty harmless but she seems to have an urge to let it off her chest as if it were bothering her. Understandably, the woman feels a rush of excitement of living a double life; by being able to write to PostSecret anonymously the woman experiences emotional relief in a public and nonjudgmental way. However, if she did disclose this information with her grand-kids per say, she could experience both the emotional relief and possible admiration on their end. 

Question 2: I think the reason she chose to keep her identity private was to maintain a certain perspective others might have of her. For example, if she holds herself as a serious, reputable woman she might not want her neighbors to know she has acted childlike and leave a negative impression on them. She might also hurt her relationship with her neighbors, after all the neighbors' have rounded up the leaves just to find they were scattered along their yards, once again. If they were to find out she did it, they might expect her to clean their yards or might even seek means to get even with her. So in fact, the risks do outweigh the benefits to disclosing this type of information with her neighbors or older friends as opposed to younger family members.

Question 3: As of now, I don't believe there is a moral obligation for the woman to come clean about her joy rides. However, this could change with further context. If another person was being blamed and fined for her joy rides then there would be a moral obligation to tell the truth before an injustice occurred.  

http://postsecret.com/

Sunday, November 1, 2015

Missing the Point


IP Press Magazine is intended for men's leisure and includes other magazines such as Maxim, Che, and others.
This particular advertisement (shown on left) was published in Belgium of 2007.To this day the picture has been circulated through social media sites a plethora amount of times.

In the print advertisement we see a easily recognizable image in history, John F. Kennedy's assassination in November of 63'. 

Now, anyone that has taken U.S history in high school can tell you that the intended target was indeed the president and not his wife. As well as note that Kennedy's wife was sitting next to him during his assassination and suffered no injuries. However, in this ad the roles are reversed. Through some analysis, we see that the image is blurred all around except for the focus on the First Lady, the only woman depicted. The colors overall are bleak and lifeless with the blacks and grays of the men's suits and car, again, except for the First Lady's dress which is pink. The dress she is wearing is very sixties and in turn, very conservative. The small print under the image makes a satiric joke and reads, "If men are your target. Make sure you don't miss them." 

As a community that that is exposed to over 100 advertisements and commercials a day we know American values have changed. Women no longer wear knee length skirts and dresses for casual dates or referred to as "ladies" in the artistic world. Nowadays it is more common to watch a male music video objectifying women and featuring women's bodies than ever before. Women degradation is becoming a common concept and it is no surprise men like Hugh Hefner have managed to make a living out of it. Men's reading subscriptions as of 2014 were as follows


*Note how the top 2 magazines offer women nudity and are considerably far larger numbers than that of the rest 
  1. Maxim: 1,228,797 subscribers
  2. Playboy: 958,885 subscribers
  3. Shortlist: 521,713 subscribers 
  4. Sport: 306,540 subscribers

Fashion Junkie




Sisley's Fashion Junkie caused quite the controversy after it was first seen in China of 2007. The advertisement (shown on left) was created for the Sisley brand to be shown throughout various high-end fashion magazines. The brand primarily features clothing for men and women and can be accessed on their website here. It is no surprise that by clicking the link we are led to find some more overly-sexualized ads for clothing, featuring razor sharp jawlines.

In the print ad two women are portrayed crowding around what seems to be a dress. Through the placement of a credit card, powder residue, straws, and dark background we can easily come to the conclusion the dress is made up crushed coke. The ever so thin women both hold straws in their hands toward the cocaine lines. One of the models holds the straw ready to inhale, while the other looks like she has just finished snorting as she looks to the camera with a tiresome gaze. The dark lighting, similar to that of a night club, adds to the eeriness of the advertisement and raises plenty of questions. For example, if Sisley has a trend of featuring "perfect" models, why do these particular models look rugged, with their roots not retouched, smudged makeup, and nipples hanging out their dresses?

Cocaine in the fashion industry has proved to be a serious issue due to the increase of substance abuse by models. Living in the era where almost every advertisement campaign features unrealistic standards of perfection, it is no shock more and more models are opting for narcotics. The fashion industry exploits women to the point where they resort to narcotics to keep them from being human by gaining weight, sleeping, and even aging. Fashion Junkie rationalizes the unhealthy relationship where print/ runway models live and breathe (and in this case snort) fashion.