Ben & Jerry’s: Taste the Lin-Sanity
http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/cambridge/2012/02/ben_jerrys_apologizes_for_jere.html
Jeremy Lin has been a topic of many sports channels over the last few weeks. A Harvard grad that came into the NBA unknown is now a household name across not only the United States but also in other countries. Jeremy Lin currently plays for the New York Knicks, and has been the top story of the NBA since the lockout ended. Ben & Jerry’s has been a reputable company for a number of years, and for the most part they have only seen a positive image for themselves. This can be a minor or major error in their part but they were quick to jump on the backlash they received and they decided to take the fortune cookie aspect out of the ice cream. This happens with a lot of companies; you have a great idea and run with it but do not look too far into the reproductions. As a company when it comes down to making a final decision you really have to take a look at all of your target market and who is going to be influenced. In my opinion I think Ben & Jerry’s rushed into the decision but made the right PR moves, what do you think?
Some questions to consider:
-Did Ben & Jerry’s make the right PR moves after the backlash?
-Do you think this has blown out of proportion, or do you feel like this is a big mistake?
-Do you think by adding fortune cookies to the company’s ice cream flavor was an insult to Jeremy Lin or the Asian population in America?
-Is there anything differently you would have done from a PR stand point?
-If you could come up with your own unique Ben & Jerry’s flavor what would it be?
Monday, February 27, 2012
Friday, February 24, 2012
What Makes A Video Go Viral?
Please see the assignment posted on Moodle. Your response to this post should be completed by Monday, February 27th at midnight. This is an assignment and will be graded.
Do some research to determine what makes a video go viral? Post the related link(s). Your opinion is great, but there is research out there, and people are examining this topic. Examination of this topic will assist you in your group project.
Do some research to determine what makes a video go viral? Post the related link(s). Your opinion is great, but there is research out there, and people are examining this topic. Examination of this topic will assist you in your group project.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Inside Apple's Factory - Dan L. Smith
Inside Apple’s iFactory
Before clicking on the link below, take a moment and ask yourself a few questions. Look around. With certainty, how many of your most cherished possessions can you claim to know their precise origin? More specifically, do you know all the meticulous processes and the vast amount of people involved in the manufacturing of the very wonder you are reading from right now? Are you conscious of this every time your flip open its top? Beyond that, are we able to list any of the even most basic of composite materials that is essential to the creation of our laptops and phones and where they are gathered from around the world?
Having listened to the intellectual debate engaged in between the individuals of this class, I am certain that the above will not be misinterpreted as a form of unwarranted chastisement. The above is simply a demonstration as to how disconnected we, as well as the whole of modern western consumer base, has become to the very goods s/he depends upon in everyday life. That’s not to say we are entirely ignorant, for I would imagine that many of you were well aware that it is often the case that our technology comes at a price, or more explicitly, at the expense of the now hollowed lives of the lower Asiatic working class. Yet we all do a fairly decent job (including myself) of repressing the actualities of human blood and sweat that is lost whenever we click that button that ships to us the latest version of our iPhone 4s...now in black.
Foxconn Photos
http://abcnews.go.com/International/slideshow/inside-apples-factories-china-15750239
ABC Tours Foxconn
http://abcnews.go.com/International/trip-ifactory-nightline-unprecedented-glimpse-inside-apples-chinese/story?id=15748745&page=2#.T0RQoRzxCR1
Having read the article, we are now re-exposed and faced once more with the grim reality of the constant trading of humanity that occurs every day, even right now, in exchange for the perpetuation of the modern technological industrialized state and the materials and goods it produces and provides for us. There’s no need to reiterate what occurs in the article. Between the mechanical men filing logos, the robotically inspired work environment, the borderline confused and ill-informed attitudes of the workers, last-minute audits, countless past “incidents”, and suicide nets, I think it does a fairly good job of portraying what goes on at Foxcomm. With this in mind, consider any of the following questions.
1) Are you in support of Apple and their labor practices, or do you think them obligated to alter them?
2) Do you think Apple, including all businesses working with Foxconn, should reevaluate working with a company that disregards the humanity of their workers in favor of profits?
3) Why do you believe Apple’s CEO declined an interview with ABC after its reporters toured Foxcomm?
4) Do you believe the workers better off with or without their jobs at Foxcomm?
5) What do you think of so many Foxcomm employees committing suicide?
Before clicking on the link below, take a moment and ask yourself a few questions. Look around. With certainty, how many of your most cherished possessions can you claim to know their precise origin? More specifically, do you know all the meticulous processes and the vast amount of people involved in the manufacturing of the very wonder you are reading from right now? Are you conscious of this every time your flip open its top? Beyond that, are we able to list any of the even most basic of composite materials that is essential to the creation of our laptops and phones and where they are gathered from around the world?
Having listened to the intellectual debate engaged in between the individuals of this class, I am certain that the above will not be misinterpreted as a form of unwarranted chastisement. The above is simply a demonstration as to how disconnected we, as well as the whole of modern western consumer base, has become to the very goods s/he depends upon in everyday life. That’s not to say we are entirely ignorant, for I would imagine that many of you were well aware that it is often the case that our technology comes at a price, or more explicitly, at the expense of the now hollowed lives of the lower Asiatic working class. Yet we all do a fairly decent job (including myself) of repressing the actualities of human blood and sweat that is lost whenever we click that button that ships to us the latest version of our iPhone 4s...now in black.
Foxconn Photos
http://abcnews.go.com/International/slideshow/inside-apples-factories-china-15750239
ABC Tours Foxconn
http://abcnews.go.com/International/trip-ifactory-nightline-unprecedented-glimpse-inside-apples-chinese/story?id=15748745&page=2#.T0RQoRzxCR1
Having read the article, we are now re-exposed and faced once more with the grim reality of the constant trading of humanity that occurs every day, even right now, in exchange for the perpetuation of the modern technological industrialized state and the materials and goods it produces and provides for us. There’s no need to reiterate what occurs in the article. Between the mechanical men filing logos, the robotically inspired work environment, the borderline confused and ill-informed attitudes of the workers, last-minute audits, countless past “incidents”, and suicide nets, I think it does a fairly good job of portraying what goes on at Foxcomm. With this in mind, consider any of the following questions.
1) Are you in support of Apple and their labor practices, or do you think them obligated to alter them?
2) Do you think Apple, including all businesses working with Foxconn, should reevaluate working with a company that disregards the humanity of their workers in favor of profits?
3) Why do you believe Apple’s CEO declined an interview with ABC after its reporters toured Foxcomm?
4) Do you believe the workers better off with or without their jobs at Foxcomm?
5) What do you think of so many Foxcomm employees committing suicide?
Monday, February 20, 2012
What is the Personality of Nichols College Brand?
The author in our text states that brands have a "personality" and it is up to the PR / Marketing person to use key words that represent our brand. Consider all of our stakeholders / publics, and discuss traits, characteristics and aspects of the Nichols College brand? Review our mission statement for further analysis, and consider if it matches our brand description. Be creative!
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
JCPenney vs. One Million Moms
Title: jcpenney vs. One Million Moms
Sources of topic:
http://crushable.com/entertainment/video-ellen-turns-her-jcpenney-haters-into-motivators-610/
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57373794/jcpenney-ceo-on-ellen-degeneres-controversy/
http://www.onemillionmoms.com/IssueDetail.asp?id=436
On January 25th, 2012, jcpenney reported in an official press release that they sponsoring Ellen DeGeneres as their spokesperson in representation of their new marketing strategy. The president of J.C. Penney Inc. stated, "Ellen DeGeneres is one of the most fun and vibrant people in entertainment today, with great warmth and a down-to-earth attitude. The millions who watch her on television and follow her through social media relate to her and trust what she has to say. Importantly, we share the same fundamental values as Ellen. At jcpenney, we couldn't think of a better partner to help us put the fun back into the retail experience. Moving forward, we'll be focused on being in sync with the rhythm of our customers' lives and operating in a 'Fair and Square' manner that is rooted in integrity, simplicity and respect. We're thrilled that she's joining our team to help convey the exciting transformation under way." These values include honesty, equality, kindness, compassion, treating people the way you want to be treated, and helping those in need, as Ellen voiced on her show.
Shortly after this press release, the activist group One Million Moms, a project of the American Family Association, posted a press release of their own. In this post OMM says that jcpenney will lose more sales than gain them and even says that their brand transformation will be unsuccessful, due to the fact that conservative families will not want to support the brand with an openly homosexual individual. OMM urges people to contact jcpenney and voice their outrage at the choice for spokesperson, and even lists the contact number for their customer service department and corporate headquarters. They even accuse jcpenney of “jumping on the pro-gay bandwagon.” Ironically, OMM only has 44,128 “likes” on Facebook.
In response to the reaction of One Million Moms, the jcpenney CEO Ron Johnson said that the company is choosing to stand behind their choice of having Ellen as a spokesperson. He even says that the company doesn’t view it as controversy. Johnson states that jcpenney was founded 110 years ago on The Golden Rule, based on treating people fairly, and having Ellen as a spokesperson was a “no-brainer.” After Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional, Ellen finally decided to speak out about the situation on her show. As per usual with Ellen, she made the situation lighthearted, and said “my haters are my motivators” and even joked about the discount she would be getting from the company. Although, her statements underline the seriousness of the issue at hand as she read the posts OMM had up on their Facebook page.
Questions to consider:
Will this situation influence your buying habits at JCP?
Do you agree or disagree with how JCP handled the situation? What would you have done?
Thoughts on Ellen’s statements? Does this help or hurt her reputation/brand name?
Sources of topic:
http://crushable.com/entertainment/video-ellen-turns-her-jcpenney-haters-into-motivators-610/
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57373794/jcpenney-ceo-on-ellen-degeneres-controversy/
http://www.onemillionmoms.com/IssueDetail.asp?id=436
On January 25th, 2012, jcpenney reported in an official press release that they sponsoring Ellen DeGeneres as their spokesperson in representation of their new marketing strategy. The president of J.C. Penney Inc. stated, "Ellen DeGeneres is one of the most fun and vibrant people in entertainment today, with great warmth and a down-to-earth attitude. The millions who watch her on television and follow her through social media relate to her and trust what she has to say. Importantly, we share the same fundamental values as Ellen. At jcpenney, we couldn't think of a better partner to help us put the fun back into the retail experience. Moving forward, we'll be focused on being in sync with the rhythm of our customers' lives and operating in a 'Fair and Square' manner that is rooted in integrity, simplicity and respect. We're thrilled that she's joining our team to help convey the exciting transformation under way." These values include honesty, equality, kindness, compassion, treating people the way you want to be treated, and helping those in need, as Ellen voiced on her show.
Shortly after this press release, the activist group One Million Moms, a project of the American Family Association, posted a press release of their own. In this post OMM says that jcpenney will lose more sales than gain them and even says that their brand transformation will be unsuccessful, due to the fact that conservative families will not want to support the brand with an openly homosexual individual. OMM urges people to contact jcpenney and voice their outrage at the choice for spokesperson, and even lists the contact number for their customer service department and corporate headquarters. They even accuse jcpenney of “jumping on the pro-gay bandwagon.” Ironically, OMM only has 44,128 “likes” on Facebook.
In response to the reaction of One Million Moms, the jcpenney CEO Ron Johnson said that the company is choosing to stand behind their choice of having Ellen as a spokesperson. He even says that the company doesn’t view it as controversy. Johnson states that jcpenney was founded 110 years ago on The Golden Rule, based on treating people fairly, and having Ellen as a spokesperson was a “no-brainer.” After Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional, Ellen finally decided to speak out about the situation on her show. As per usual with Ellen, she made the situation lighthearted, and said “my haters are my motivators” and even joked about the discount she would be getting from the company. Although, her statements underline the seriousness of the issue at hand as she read the posts OMM had up on their Facebook page.
Questions to consider:
Will this situation influence your buying habits at JCP?
Do you agree or disagree with how JCP handled the situation? What would you have done?
Thoughts on Ellen’s statements? Does this help or hurt her reputation/brand name?
Deception at Duke University
Deception at Duke UniversityBy: Kelly VaillancourtSource: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7398476n&tag=contentMain;contentAux
*Note: This video is brief (approx. 13:46), and it is important that you watch it in full in order to understand the scope of the issue at hand.Five years ago, Duke University announced that it had found the “holy grail” of cancer research—they’d discovered how to match a patient’s tumor to the best chemotherapy drug. This discovery was a breakthrough because every person’s DNA is unique, therefore every tumor is different. To clarify, and as Scott Pelley noted, “a drug that kills a tumor in one person may not be effective in another”. The scientist behind this discovery was Dr. Anil Potti, who soon became the face of the future of cancer treatment at Duke. In a televised advertisement for Duke’s Cancer Center, Dr. Potti promised the public that his discovery would not only change the face of medicine, but would “revolutionize cancer therapy.”
The breakthrough was made in the lab of Dr. Joseph Nevins, who saw significant potential in Dr. Potti and as a result, became a mentor and supporter of him. Shortly thereafter, research was published under the name of Nevins & Potti, and was featured in prestigious medical journals such as the Journal of Clinical Oncology and the New England Journal of Medicine.
Once Dr. Potti’s breakthrough discovery was published, Kevin Coombes and Keith Baggerly of the MD Anderson Cancer Center began analyzing his results. However, what they found did not support Dr. Potti’s discovery; rather, it was quite the contrary. As Baggerly stated in his interview with Pelley, what they found was “odd, and could not be explained.” As a result, Coombes and Baggerly emailed Duke with their questions regarding Dr. Potti’s discovery. Dr. Potti responded himself, saying that the errors found were merely “clerical,” and that new work confirmed his results.
Nevins and Potti applied for patents on the research, and they (as well as the university) stood to make a fortune. Furthermore, they decided to perform a series of clinical trials on a total of 112 patients who signed up. The tumors of the affected patients “would be surgically biopsied in order to be matched with the best drug.”
During the trials, Coombes and Baggerly continued to analyze Dr. Potti’s research. They were able to conclude that Dr. Potti undoubtedly “reversed” a large portion of the data, which would result in patients getting the worst drug as opposed to the best drug for their tumors. This discovery ultimately led to the suspension of the Duke Cancer Center’s clinical trials, and the call for an outside review committee to further analyze Dr. Potti’s research. As it turns out, the review committee concluded that Dr. Potti was right.
As the clinical trials continued, a man by the name of Walter Jacobs decided he would allow his wife Juliet, who suffered from stage IV lung cancer, to undergo a clinical trial. Walter and Juliet Jacobs were told that the chances of finding the right drug were an astounding 80%. However, what Dr. Potti failed to tell them was that the clinical trials had previously been suspended due to errors in his research.
Nevins himself began to review the data from the clinical trials. He soon came to find that when the underlying data disproved that of Dr. Potti, it was changed—meaning Dr. Potti had actually manipulated the data, and Coombes and Baggerly’s presumptions were right from the get-go.
Juliet Jacobs died merely three months after she entered the clinical trial at Duke University’s Cancer Center, and Dr. Potti resigned shortly thereafter. Walter Jacobs has since filed suit.
Questions to Consider:
1. Should Dr. Joseph Nevins resign from Duke University? Do you believe doing so would “preserve” Duke’s image?
2. Did Duke purposely overlook Dr. Potti’s errors because it was more concerned with the financial gains it would receive from the clinical trials?
3. Now that this story has been aired on national television, how should Duke University respond in regards to PR?
*Note: This video is brief (approx. 13:46), and it is important that you watch it in full in order to understand the scope of the issue at hand.Five years ago, Duke University announced that it had found the “holy grail” of cancer research—they’d discovered how to match a patient’s tumor to the best chemotherapy drug. This discovery was a breakthrough because every person’s DNA is unique, therefore every tumor is different. To clarify, and as Scott Pelley noted, “a drug that kills a tumor in one person may not be effective in another”. The scientist behind this discovery was Dr. Anil Potti, who soon became the face of the future of cancer treatment at Duke. In a televised advertisement for Duke’s Cancer Center, Dr. Potti promised the public that his discovery would not only change the face of medicine, but would “revolutionize cancer therapy.”
The breakthrough was made in the lab of Dr. Joseph Nevins, who saw significant potential in Dr. Potti and as a result, became a mentor and supporter of him. Shortly thereafter, research was published under the name of Nevins & Potti, and was featured in prestigious medical journals such as the Journal of Clinical Oncology and the New England Journal of Medicine.
Once Dr. Potti’s breakthrough discovery was published, Kevin Coombes and Keith Baggerly of the MD Anderson Cancer Center began analyzing his results. However, what they found did not support Dr. Potti’s discovery; rather, it was quite the contrary. As Baggerly stated in his interview with Pelley, what they found was “odd, and could not be explained.” As a result, Coombes and Baggerly emailed Duke with their questions regarding Dr. Potti’s discovery. Dr. Potti responded himself, saying that the errors found were merely “clerical,” and that new work confirmed his results.
Nevins and Potti applied for patents on the research, and they (as well as the university) stood to make a fortune. Furthermore, they decided to perform a series of clinical trials on a total of 112 patients who signed up. The tumors of the affected patients “would be surgically biopsied in order to be matched with the best drug.”
During the trials, Coombes and Baggerly continued to analyze Dr. Potti’s research. They were able to conclude that Dr. Potti undoubtedly “reversed” a large portion of the data, which would result in patients getting the worst drug as opposed to the best drug for their tumors. This discovery ultimately led to the suspension of the Duke Cancer Center’s clinical trials, and the call for an outside review committee to further analyze Dr. Potti’s research. As it turns out, the review committee concluded that Dr. Potti was right.
As the clinical trials continued, a man by the name of Walter Jacobs decided he would allow his wife Juliet, who suffered from stage IV lung cancer, to undergo a clinical trial. Walter and Juliet Jacobs were told that the chances of finding the right drug were an astounding 80%. However, what Dr. Potti failed to tell them was that the clinical trials had previously been suspended due to errors in his research.
Nevins himself began to review the data from the clinical trials. He soon came to find that when the underlying data disproved that of Dr. Potti, it was changed—meaning Dr. Potti had actually manipulated the data, and Coombes and Baggerly’s presumptions were right from the get-go.
Juliet Jacobs died merely three months after she entered the clinical trial at Duke University’s Cancer Center, and Dr. Potti resigned shortly thereafter. Walter Jacobs has since filed suit.
Questions to Consider:
1. Should Dr. Joseph Nevins resign from Duke University? Do you believe doing so would “preserve” Duke’s image?
2. Did Duke purposely overlook Dr. Potti’s errors because it was more concerned with the financial gains it would receive from the clinical trials?
3. Now that this story has been aired on national television, how should Duke University respond in regards to PR?
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
A Higher Power?
Josh Bassett
A higher power?
http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2011/story/_/id/7524999/super-bowl-2012-myra-hiatt-kraft-provides-guiding-light-patriots
Even though the Patriots have had a great season and ending with a winning record its not all smiles. In July a special lady passed away from breast cancer. At the age of 68, Mrya Hiatt Kraft lived life to the fullest. Mrya and Robert Kraft were married for the past 48 years. She meant the world to all people that were on the Patriots team. She didn’t care about the game most players said. She was more worried about true feelings and not the business side of life. She wanted to know how their families were. The team wears a patch on the left side of there jerseys that says “MHK”. In the AFC Championship game Green-Ellis broke the tie with a touch down. “ He dropped the ball in the end zone, touched his MHK patch, then his face mask as if to give the woman the players called "Mama" a kiss, then pointed skyward.” After someone does something good they touch the patch. Some say it’s like Tebowing but its more thanking her for looking down and having that 12 player on the field. As we all know the Patriots ended up winning the game because the Ravens kicker missed the field goal. Everyone felt that there was a larger power in the stadium that night, Mrya. It was a 32-yard kick that should have forced overtime. The ball went wide left, like someone hit the ball in the air away from the goal posts. The team gave the Kraft family a framed picture of her initials with the team under it looking up. It has been hanging in the middle of the team’s locker room for the past games they won. The picture was shipped on the plane with the team and is now hanging in the locker room at the Super bowl. Mr. Kraft’s family estimated worth is around 1.3 billion dollars. He has donated more than 100 million dollars to charity. She was a great women and she will never be forgotten. When you go to Gillette stadium you can feel the peace in the air looking down on you.
1. Do you believe in the higher power?
2. In your eyes even though they didn’t win the super bowl was the message of dedication the season to Myra accomplished?
3. How do you feel about Robert donating 100 million dollars to charity?
A higher power?
http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2011/story/_/id/7524999/super-bowl-2012-myra-hiatt-kraft-provides-guiding-light-patriots
Even though the Patriots have had a great season and ending with a winning record its not all smiles. In July a special lady passed away from breast cancer. At the age of 68, Mrya Hiatt Kraft lived life to the fullest. Mrya and Robert Kraft were married for the past 48 years. She meant the world to all people that were on the Patriots team. She didn’t care about the game most players said. She was more worried about true feelings and not the business side of life. She wanted to know how their families were. The team wears a patch on the left side of there jerseys that says “MHK”. In the AFC Championship game Green-Ellis broke the tie with a touch down. “ He dropped the ball in the end zone, touched his MHK patch, then his face mask as if to give the woman the players called "Mama" a kiss, then pointed skyward.” After someone does something good they touch the patch. Some say it’s like Tebowing but its more thanking her for looking down and having that 12 player on the field. As we all know the Patriots ended up winning the game because the Ravens kicker missed the field goal. Everyone felt that there was a larger power in the stadium that night, Mrya. It was a 32-yard kick that should have forced overtime. The ball went wide left, like someone hit the ball in the air away from the goal posts. The team gave the Kraft family a framed picture of her initials with the team under it looking up. It has been hanging in the middle of the team’s locker room for the past games they won. The picture was shipped on the plane with the team and is now hanging in the locker room at the Super bowl. Mr. Kraft’s family estimated worth is around 1.3 billion dollars. He has donated more than 100 million dollars to charity. She was a great women and she will never be forgotten. When you go to Gillette stadium you can feel the peace in the air looking down on you.
1. Do you believe in the higher power?
2. In your eyes even though they didn’t win the super bowl was the message of dedication the season to Myra accomplished?
3. How do you feel about Robert donating 100 million dollars to charity?
The Bad, Ugly, Truth about Reality TV Families
The Bad, Ugly, Truth about Reality TV Families
By: Katelynn Havener
Sources of Topic:
http://m.zimbio.com/Kim+Kardashian/articles/GbNDYQwriUK/Does+Reality+TV+Ruin+Lives
http://www.examiner.com/celebrity-social-media-in-national/real-housewives-of-beverly-hills-armstrong-suicide-is-reality-tv-ruining-lives
The controversy that has put Bravo TV at possible fault for death. Prior to the phenomenon of all of the various Real Housewives series, this unconventional entertainment channel was not known for any particular show. However, after the success of Real Housewives of New York and Orange County, the station’s popularity has since skyrocketed. I myself am one of the Real Housewives junkies, Beverly Hills being my favorite. I wanted to discuss the controversies of reality television, as I personally feel that I have watched the lives and families of this cast unravel and be completely torn apart. Just months prior to the suicide-death of Russell Armstrong, fans watched as Kelsey Grammer (most commonly known for his psychiatrist role on Fraiser) angrily left his bitter, severely under-weight wife, Camille. All the meanwhile, Camille took her newfound divorcee energy and got right in the middle of Taylor and Russell’s private marital affairs. After hearing accounts of her good friend’s struggles with domestic assault, Camille was the only cast member to speak up on getting Taylor help. In a bizarre turn of events, Camille ended up with a lawsuit for perjury from Russell, and less than two weeks later the Real Housewives husband was found hanging in the multimillion dollar home the couple had shared with their 5 year old daughter, Kennedy. The show explicitly revealed Taylor and Russell’s counseling sessions, helped cover up Taylor’s bruises during make-up before filming, and aired Camille’s attempted intervention of Taylor. The season has ended as Camille now battles in court with Russell’s family, and as a little girl is left without the role of a father figure. Who here is to blame?
Real Housewives is just one show which demonstrates and highlights stars at their ultimate worse. The entertainment values for the viewers and fans of reality TV could in fact be putting reputations and now lives of those being filmed at stake. Which brings the question; Are the producers from all of these shows bringing cast members to behave and act irrationally? Would all of the divorces still have come about if a camera had not been shoved into their homes? Would the Jersey Shore ‘family’ be just as classless and entertaining if they were not one of the top shows to ever air on MTV? I myself am on the fence. Personally, I think you’re already insane if you are letting a camera invade your house 24/7, to only be turned off if you need to pee. Conversely, I also feel that the producers bring a reality star to their brink as a means to make money. As a RHOBH ‘activist’, I believe this past season should not have even been aired given the series of traumatic events. Not to mention that the show doesn’t even seem to have shed a tear about one of their near and dear wife’s battle with physical abuse, or that an innocent child will forever have to live with the death of her dad becoming a now very public affair.
Questions to Consider:
1. Do you believe reality TV has slowly ruined the lives of those being taped? Or do these stars set themselves up for disaster?
2. If you do follow reality TV, what examples of a family or a personal life have you seen exploited?
3. Was Bravo TV a factor in Russell Armstrong’s death? Do you believe they owe the Armstrong family an apology?
4. What crisis PR would you implement if you worked for Bravo TV, and had to deal with the backlash of the show?
By: Katelynn Havener
Sources of Topic:
http://m.zimbio.com/Kim+Kardashian/articles/GbNDYQwriUK/Does+Reality+TV+Ruin+Lives
http://www.examiner.com/celebrity-social-media-in-national/real-housewives-of-beverly-hills-armstrong-suicide-is-reality-tv-ruining-lives
The controversy that has put Bravo TV at possible fault for death. Prior to the phenomenon of all of the various Real Housewives series, this unconventional entertainment channel was not known for any particular show. However, after the success of Real Housewives of New York and Orange County, the station’s popularity has since skyrocketed. I myself am one of the Real Housewives junkies, Beverly Hills being my favorite. I wanted to discuss the controversies of reality television, as I personally feel that I have watched the lives and families of this cast unravel and be completely torn apart. Just months prior to the suicide-death of Russell Armstrong, fans watched as Kelsey Grammer (most commonly known for his psychiatrist role on Fraiser) angrily left his bitter, severely under-weight wife, Camille. All the meanwhile, Camille took her newfound divorcee energy and got right in the middle of Taylor and Russell’s private marital affairs. After hearing accounts of her good friend’s struggles with domestic assault, Camille was the only cast member to speak up on getting Taylor help. In a bizarre turn of events, Camille ended up with a lawsuit for perjury from Russell, and less than two weeks later the Real Housewives husband was found hanging in the multimillion dollar home the couple had shared with their 5 year old daughter, Kennedy. The show explicitly revealed Taylor and Russell’s counseling sessions, helped cover up Taylor’s bruises during make-up before filming, and aired Camille’s attempted intervention of Taylor. The season has ended as Camille now battles in court with Russell’s family, and as a little girl is left without the role of a father figure. Who here is to blame?
Real Housewives is just one show which demonstrates and highlights stars at their ultimate worse. The entertainment values for the viewers and fans of reality TV could in fact be putting reputations and now lives of those being filmed at stake. Which brings the question; Are the producers from all of these shows bringing cast members to behave and act irrationally? Would all of the divorces still have come about if a camera had not been shoved into their homes? Would the Jersey Shore ‘family’ be just as classless and entertaining if they were not one of the top shows to ever air on MTV? I myself am on the fence. Personally, I think you’re already insane if you are letting a camera invade your house 24/7, to only be turned off if you need to pee. Conversely, I also feel that the producers bring a reality star to their brink as a means to make money. As a RHOBH ‘activist’, I believe this past season should not have even been aired given the series of traumatic events. Not to mention that the show doesn’t even seem to have shed a tear about one of their near and dear wife’s battle with physical abuse, or that an innocent child will forever have to live with the death of her dad becoming a now very public affair.
Questions to Consider:
1. Do you believe reality TV has slowly ruined the lives of those being taped? Or do these stars set themselves up for disaster?
2. If you do follow reality TV, what examples of a family or a personal life have you seen exploited?
3. Was Bravo TV a factor in Russell Armstrong’s death? Do you believe they owe the Armstrong family an apology?
4. What crisis PR would you implement if you worked for Bravo TV, and had to deal with the backlash of the show?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)