Ethics of Downloading Illegally

                Downloading music illegally?  Where’s the issue?  Many people are quick to announce that they obtain their music library via illegal downloads and that there’s nothing wrong with it because it’s not stealing if the record company and the artist still have the track or album. 

                But take into consideration Kant’s categorical imperative.  If each individual who sought out music from the internet downloaded tracks without paying, how would artists and companies be able to stay afloat?  It may seem like downloading a song just this once without paying has no real impact on anything, but there are other factors that should be taken into consideration besides the obvious “this is easy and free for me.”  According to Kant, practical reasoning is how to approach an issue, rather than empirical means. 

                Another great mind to think of while pondering the arguments illegally downloading music can lead to is Aristotle.  He raised the idea of ethics as a subject.  His philosophies  concerning moral virtue and character are relevant still today.  They revolve around what people do voluntarily—such as downloading music without paying (for a modern twist). 

                Yet another viewpoint worth mentioning is Sissela Bok and her 3-step analysis for situations.  The first step says to consult your conscience.  Perhaps this is a great time to ponder Kant and Aristotle and how they would view your choice to download illegally—or commit a crime if harsher words sink in better.  The second step instructs us to seek alternatives.  This could be something as simple as just listening to the song or album on YouTube (for free!), or using a program such as iTunes to legally acquire the music. The third step is to hold an imaginary dialogue with the parties involved.  Imagine having a conversation with the artist whose music you have playing in your iPod, but never paid for, and explaining why you have it, yet why they didn’t profit from it.  This could also mean imagining getting a letter from the Recording Industry stating that you have violated the law and could face persecution. 

                Even though it’s incredibly tempting to download music off the internet without giving any fair monetary trade, there should be a decision making process taking place that doesn’t always revolve around the listener/downloader, and instead the other people involved in the equation.  

Ads! Ads Everywhere!

Being exposed to advertising and marketing schemes is inevitable in today’s culture.  I can’t even count how many ads I was exposed to during the past 24 hours: less than 100? more than 100?  1000?  Persuasive (and sometimes invasive) ads are everywhere.  I woke up, and like any normal college-aged female, I checked Facebook and Twitter as if they were the morning news. 

This time, I ignored the posts from friends about what they did the night before, and instead turned my attention to the ads along the side.  They’re tailored to my “likes.”  For example, I “liked” a Greek website (where one purchases sorority or fraternity letters) and, go figure, an ad along the side was for a different Greek gear site.  It offered me coupons if I clicked the link and filled out a survey. 

On Twitter, certain things are promoted.  Today, it’s Sprint promoting their new phone.  Also on Twitter, accounts with a lot of followers typically gain sponsors or advertisers that pay them to put 140-character ads.  Personally, I follow my fair share of “girly” Twitter accounts, and the typical ads that they post relate to three main things: losing weight, teeth whitening, and fashion.  Obviously, they are stereotypical girl-things, but every once in a while, some of the weight-loss ones are borderline inappropriate.  One I saw was trying to sell a diet pill that promised to make you lose 14 pounds in ten days.  Granted, I understand the dangers of that, but it does concern me how many younger girls are on Twitter and may see this and believe that this is a healthy way to lose weight.

Besides ads on the internet, there are countless ads on television.  Generally, I don’t watch much television.  But the ads reflect the shows that are on.  It’s signaling at its finest.

I also saw many print ads.  In the New York Times there are many encouraging fashion (Tiffany’s ad on page two is a staple).  Even around campus there are fliers promoting different events and sales going on within various groups.  The potty paper in the stalls?  That’s a feminist ad if you ask me.  It promotes events and gatherings that revolve around (mostly) feminist issues. 

Once I opened my eyes and realized just how many ads are put in front of them daily, it made me feel slightly concerned.  I tend to tune out a majority of them, but I know many people who buy into these biased promotions constantly.  

"Guitar World" Analysis

Just grazing at the cover of “Guitar World” magazine, it’s clear that the people who typically pick up and dive into the pages are not women in their 20s.  With hooks like “Lamb of God: Metal’s Greatest Band Blazes a New Trail” gracing the cover, the magazine appears to want to catch the attention of heavy metal fans who, well, play and love guitar.

 The advertisements are all geared towards male musicians.  Varying from guitars, to stomp pedals that attach to iPhones, to recorders.  Most of them feature men or famous guitarists from heavy metal or rock bands cradling their choice of electric guitar or amp.  Some don’t even include people, rather just up close photos of a guitar in order to exhibit its detailing.  Most of the products featured don’t have prices listed, but with a little research, it’s clear that items advertised are quite expensive, which would probably mean that a decent amount of readers have a steady source of income.

Brad Tolinski, the editor-in-chief, displays his own knowledge and love of music in his editor’s note.  It’s more of a synapsis/abstract of an article or essay.  Other original content is very well written and focused. There are a lot of musician profiles (including great interview sections), which serve as great inspiration for any hopeful rock star.  Many of the pieces are centered around how a musician plays rather than what they play—which reinforces the idea that this magazine is produced for people who actively play rather than those who just listen to the music discussed.   The last 20 pages are devoted solely to guitar chords for various famous songs.  There’s even a poster folded in the middle of Lamb of God that any diehard fan would pull out and promptly tape to their wall for heavy metal encouragement. 

According to the magazine’s website, 97% of readers are men with an average age of 33.  ¾ are employed with average incomes of $84,000.  The average reader owns 5 guitars, but appears to always be looking for more (55% plan to purchase a guitar within the next 12 months and are willing to pay $2000 or more for a decent one). Their demographics are consistent with the material within the covers that signal to male musicians they’re in the right place.  

Whitney Houston - CNN & Al Jazeera

CNN

Al Jazeera

                It’s probably the most talked about current event that was undeniably above the fold in countless newspapers: (you guessed it) the death of singer Whitney Houston. 

                You simply need to type a “W” into the Google search bar and instantly news stories and videos and pictures of the beloved singer are at your fingertips.  However, the tragedy of her untimely death was covered in different ways.  This is evident by focusing on how CNN and Al Jazeera approached the event. 

                First off, in the video/story from Al Jazeera (provided in the link above), it’s fairly clear that they’re more focused on the darker side of the singer.  They zone in on her drug and alcohol use alone with her abusive relationship with her husband.  They even say “in recent years, her career became a sad tale of drug abuse and personal tragedy.”  Although they do say her death will be mourned, it seems as if they were more concerned about the idea that she may have died because of drinking or drugs—even though at this time, there is no autopsy report proving that theory. 

                On the other hand, in the video link from CNN provided, the overall feel is more solemn and emotional.  CNN focused more on the positive aspects of Houston’s life.  They acknowledge the fact that there is currently no cause of death listed—even though they do reference her 2002 interview with Diane Sawyer where she admitted drug use and coined the phrase “crack is whack.”  The reporter mentions his own feelings and memories of listening to her music.  It’s a more subjective approach to the story, while Al Jazeera seems to be more objective.              

                I feel that the audiences of each network need to be taken into consideration.  In my personal opinion and experience with both networks, I feel that CNN is not as conservative as Al Jazeera and therefore, more open to the moods that stories such as the death of a pop music icon can induce.  I also believe that the Al Jazeera news wouldn’t attract many fans of the singer.  One thing I noticed when looking through videos was that CNN had a black reporter, which really could mean nothing, but it could also reinforce the idea that CNN’s audience would rather hear the good about Houston than the negative.  

iCarly & Hannah Montana

Let me start off by saying that no, I do not religiously watch iCarly or Hannah Montana or any show with similar ideas.  I do, however, watch my six-year-old niece watch these shows and I see how they affect her.  (Also, I am choosing to write about her favorite shows as opposed to my own because, quite simply, I don't watch enough television to have a favorite.)  When I was her age, my favorite shows didn’t have main characters that were famous and bratty (hello, DJ Tanner), and if a child was portrayed as bratty, they weren’t meant to be looked up to (and we didn’t).  Now, I am fully aware that these shows today are fiction and technically shouldn’t be taken seriously.  However, they aren’t depicted like that to their young, impressionable audience.  My niece is under the impression that it’s possible to lead a life like Hannah Montana and be rich and famous by the time she’s sixteen.  And sure, iCarly puts a high value on friendship and that’s great, but the characters are never shown as having parents or other family.  And if there is a parent figure presented at all, they are depicted as being annoying and stupid (the brother in iCarly).  The show shows these friends doing all sorts of crazy things that would never fly in a typical household, such as skipping class, going against teachers, etc., and getting away with it all—while being famous on the side.  Clearly, these ideas should be rejected, but I have seen my niece imitate the shows.  Both shows have glamorous girls as leads and supporting roles—their hair is always done and their makeup is flawless (not to mention very thin and rarely shown eating)--which young girls are interpreting the wrong way.  They feel like they need to wear makeup and they need to own every Hannah Montana/iCarly merchandise known to man. It is so easy for these sorts of shows to seduce this young audience into believing that beauty, fame, and money will get you anywhere and that anyone can attain that status with little to no work, not to mention education (which is never stressed in the programs).