Tribute to King of Pop

Asian fans mourn "King of Pop"

Article Here

It is undeniable that the King of Pop, Michael Jackson, born in 1958, has and will always be one of the most influential media person that contributed to the US globalisation of mass media.

By the age of 11, the very talented Michael Jackson is already named a superstar. He started his singing career in America and his music soon spread fast across to all. He can be considered as the first who introduced and brought the American pop music to the Asian culture. His creation of songs, dance moves and fashion had turned to classics and will always be remembered by the people.

From the above, we can see how powerful the media is to dominating the world. US had always been the most important participant the the global mass media industry and is the biggest exporter of mass media products internationally. Therefore, we tend to receive and absorb many of the American culture that were imported and shown to us.

Back to Michael Jackson, he was not only known for his most wonderful music. But rather, he was also well known for his weirdest behaviours. It would probably be too long a post to name them all out. And because he is such an leading figure in the media, his unexplained actions such as plastic surgeries, drugs and child sexual abuses had the power to diffuse ideas to the public and affect his die hard fans. The things he did were always magnified and discussed globally and has the ability to change people's perception.

No doubts that he is the greatest creator and contributor that brought many music lovers all over the world together. But putting aside his works and actions, Michael Jackson will never be who he is today without the presence of media to promote him. The media has the ability to package and shape a person, and many a times, real life reality are being defined by media. Because of Michael Jackson, people had a affixed an image of how pop artists should be like, how they should be talented in the several ways. Although I was only a young kid when he made his mark, I will always view Michael Jackson as a legend.

Woman accused of agreeing to be 'fall guy'

Leung Man Kwan, who is out on bail, could be jailed for up to seven years and fined if she is convicted.

The Straits Times, Friday, June 19 2009, Home Pg C6

...

This is a short article that took up a quarter page of the Straits Times, home section. It is a case of a woman who allegedly accepted $1000 in payment for taking the fall for someone else over a traffic infringement of running a red light.

...

Initially, it stepped on my curiousity to continue reading what are the add ons to her actions, that might lead her in jail for up to seven years if found convicted. However, as I screen through the details of the news, there was not much that is further elaborated. It left me wondering if she really deserve such a heavy sentence for perverting this course of justice.

...

We all know that the news was published to firstly, provide receivers with news and information that we need to get through a day. Secondly, it served as a cultural transmission to educate the masses. I believe that is why the news was somehow being exaggerated here, since such 'transactions' are certainly not rare among the citizens, and most probably happens frequently daily. However, it was not quite possible to trace them down and therefore these cases are taken lightly by the offenders. I see this as a tactic of the government using the media to reinforce and posing a 'scare' to the public.

...

Next, the media's agenda setting function had selected to report little on the case and putting a huge focus on the punishment thats Leung Man Kwan might receive, this clearly shows that the media gatekeepers had chose the issues to which the government wanted to gain wide attention on.

...

I believe some issues here are also made invisible, because the media would reflect and reproduce only those ideas and values that uphold their interests and purpose. I found the lack of information of how the police managed to identify the case, and why would she be convicted to such huge sentence. The punishment for the real convict who run the red light, and the mastermind police officer who came up with the suggestion and roped the transaction, was not mentioned at all.

...

Although the newspaper is one of the most reliable sources here in Singapore, this had certainly left me putting big doubts on their media reports. Some commented that because the police officer's sister is one of the highest ranking woman police officer in the force and therefore he can get away with it. I have heard many cases like these, when people approach relatives and friends who works in the government sector for help and often succeed.

...

However, even if these cases identified and caught, I am sure they will not be reported and published as this will impose a bad image for Singapore's government and police force sector.

...

So, do you agree with me, in relation to the above article, that the media had played powerful effects in controlling and choosing the 'beneficial' information to be published? (:

Push for Japan organ transplant reform

"Japan is a global leader in medical research and techonology, but has the toughest laws of any developed country for organ donations, in part because of the cultural perceptions of death."

- Straits Times, Friday, June 12 2009.

Article Here

...

The tough laws are making it hard for patients to receive donated organs. This article is about a young kid, Sotaro Nakazawa, whom died at the age of one. His father said that there are two things that killed his son. One is the heart disease and the other, is the fact that he was born in Japan.

...

"To this day it is difficult to obtain consent from bereaved families for organ donation or dissection for medical education or pathological anatomy . . . the Japanese regard them all in the sense of injuring a dead body." -Shinto concept concerning the dead human body

...

This goes down back to how culture and religion can affect one's perception of things. Even when it is a matter of life and death here, the cultural beliefs in Japan was held strong that injuring a dead body is a serious crime. Thus, organ transplant in Japan are often put to halt and many patients with heart disorders were not fortunate enough to be given another chance to live.

...

On the other hand, many religious groups such as Islamics, Christians, Catholics, Buddhism etc, view organ and tissue donations as an act of charity and love. They permit organs donations such as to help put lives to an noble end.

...

Again, there is no right or wrong to it, but it goes back to what type of culture and influence we are brought up in, understanding about what is true. Although it seem very much unacceptable to the majority of Japanese religion to cause disrespect to the brain dead, I feel that there is no reason why would they rather sacrifice another worthy person chance of living. It is a pity when a person has to leave the world, but since there is no way we can salvage it, why not let another person help live life to the fullest. Isn't it more meaningful than to hold on to some emotional and religious beliefs.

...

Several proposals to change the law are now being debated in Japan's Parliament, and this may seal the fate of more that 12,000 Japanese patients currently waiting to receive organs. I am too hoping that the religious groups in Japan will view such matters in a more collectivism way. Such as putting mutual sympathy, making self-sacrifices for people of their own country at least. Although I know this is not going to be a easy path, perhaps the government should communicate and take actions to eventually implement and build in different new values to the people.

...

Lastly, I feel that organs donation is a nothing to lose situation, as long as it does not goes against the donor's wish. I think it is about how certain religion perceive the definition of death. What do you think? (:

I'm a Striker...

"I'm a striker and not a left winger," says Rooney, as he hits out at boss Ferguson.
...

Above is a claim by Wayne Rooney after a match against Kazakhstan. He proved himself with the match's results, that he is better as a centre-forward than a winger. Rooney played on the left in the first half, which finished goalless. He moved inside for the second half, and scored twice in a 5-1 victory.

...

Relevant Article: Here
...

A soccer group comprises of 11 players, working hands in hands, or rather, legs in legs. They are a group of interdependence team players, although responsible for different roles, eventually playing towards a common goal.

I happen to pass by this article and find it a good example of Group Communication. Rooney was declaring that: "although it is a team game, but maybe i have to be more selfish in where I want to play..."

Previously playing for Manchester United, Rooney was given the position to play as a winger. It was not his choice, but the manager's decision. This is when group pressure comes in; whereby Rooney's needs and the group needs comes in conflict.

From my point of view, Rooney, at a bigger point is taking care of his personal interest by proving that he is good scoring as a striker. On the other hand, the team's manager has to look at the bigger picture, trying his best to assign positions he thinks is best for each individual player, getting the most beneficial results out of it. Rooney might have to face it that this is a team thing, and he must understand the role he plays in the team. Everyone has the rights to speak up in a team, but not forgetting to open up for comments and discussion.

I am admitting that I do not know much about soccer. However, to me, a group is one that have to make compromise. Perhaps working in a group, the process is much more important than how the results turn out. Rooney might have prove his competency better when playing as striker, but looking at other possible factors, it could have been a psychological effect that made him achieve such results.

Rooney is now playing for the England team, which is offering him the position he likes playing most. He has got what he wanted and is doing a good job out of it. However, ultimately one has to understand that this is a team thing, everyone has to be able to identify their roles and position, and not let stubbornness strike up, causing uneccessary disputes that affects the process and results.

Your couch or mine?

''The world is friendlier through a website where you host foreign visitors or stay at their homes.''

-Article attached here

About a week ago, I read about this particular website on straits times. CouchSurfing.org was set up as a worldwide network for making connections between travellers and the local communities they visit. We can put it simply as letting a total stranger sleep over at your house, or you travelling overseas and bunking in to other's apartment for free.
..

We have been reminded time and time again to be cautious while using the internet to make connections. We were told not to meet up strangers, not to trust people in the virtual world etc. Yet now, CouchSurfing is promoting and building this 'risky' new hobby for interested participants.

..

We learnt that interpersonal relationships are built with another individual to satisfy personal social needs and goals. Through CouchSurfing, members benefit not only by getting free accommodation and free hosting, but also much about to enjoy the cultural exchange and get a local feel of the place they are visiting. CouchSurfing therefore contributes immensely to the global shift in consciousness.

..

I would say this type of relationship is much of a surface thing, it does not goes deep into self disclosure or the need for looking into other attributes. Users start engaging through the website, viewing through photos, profiles and testimonials. Management starts when the host and traveller meet where they enjoy their face to face interaction. Three days later, it is disengagement. Therefore, I would say CouchSurfing is generally building short term relationships, which people give, take and leave.

..

It certainly has brought upon many convenience and benefits for travellers, but I personally still feel that there are too many negative factors over the gains to such relationships. It might sound really great to interact and have someone from a different culture to mix with. But what makes one trust a totally unknown stranger from another country, who might share different culture, values and beliefs, to stay over in the house. I would rather put in more effort and time in finding more reliable sources through friends, workplace, school etc. It just sounds much more practical to me than putting myself into unnecessary risks.

..

One frequent traveller and member of CouchSurfing said that "People are finally breaking those boundaries of fear and separation, and opening their homes to "complete strangers" who are actually part of them in the same way that different drops of water are part of each other in a big ocean. And this ocean will now just keep getting bigger and more powerful." I agree that CouchSurfing is doing a great job in bringing people together, making another big step towards globalisation. But is it going to work that simply? There are just way too many uncertainties. I just hope while looking at the benefits of it, people will protect themselves and not let any mishaps affect them.

..

What do you think? (:

Sexually Challenged- your definition

"Many sexually challenged women were among the most vocal and vociferous supporters of the old guard."

The above statement was extracted from a letter written by Dr Thio Su Mien, as response to the gay agenda issue of Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware).

The letter mainly states that Aware had veered it's initial purpose into promoting the lesbianism and homosexuality political agenda. Disturbed by what she saw, she began urging women she knew to challenge Aware’s attempts to redefine marriage and families.

Having enough said of whether Aware had been doing the right thing, the focus here is that the phrase 'sexually challenged women' used in the letter seemed to have aroused many people's concern. The urban dictionary shows that 'sexually challenged' is a politically correct word for homosexual. It is perhaps supposely understood that Dr Thio had used the phrase in place of the word 'lesbians.'

This is of course still up to individuals to define it. However, I have to agree that there is definitely some attached meaning to the phrase used. Some readers found it rude and offensive as they relate the phrase 'sexually challenged' as to being 'sexually incline.' Does this then mean to categorise lebians as sexually incompetent women.

Therefore, readers rebutted that Dr Thio, a born-again christian, isn't giving respect to the homosexual ladies.

Personally, I read the attached meaning, paired together with the words 'vocal and vociferous,' as women who choose to defy the nature of sexuality. It sounds like lesbians are ones who are trying to challenge their way through and defy the society, promoting the feminist issue, and definitely this is not the case. Thus, I stand my view that the phrase 'sexually challenged' shouldn't be used.

There might be some self-serving bias here as I have always been open about homosexuals, probably due to the friends and environment influence. I have seen many pairs who really care and love each other, definitely not for the sake of being a feminist or whatever. Therefore emotions and feelings are sure to struck me. Similarly, the reason why Dr Thio would use the phrase, it might be because of her christianity status that affects how she perceive certain issues.

The language used is subjective, and a simple phrase here had evoked many thoughts and perceptions. So, what do you see in the phrase? (:

Reference: Dr Thio's Letter

I'm dying to move out of my parents house (edited and followed up)

"now that I've turned 21, however, these seemingly trivial squabbles have suddenly become an issue of personal freedom and space"-CLEO, free speech by Selina Leong

I came across an article in the recent cleo magazine and found it an interesting enough topic to begin with. Since my audience are mostly young adults, it triggers me to grab the chance to analyse and find out how young adults feel about the need of having bigger personal space and freedom.

I will first start by analysing the current situation that i see here in Singapore. Personally, i feel that a majority of local kids, as compared to many other countries, are well known to be pampered and spoiled. Largely due to the trend of small families, whereby most households choose to stick with one or two children, they make sure their children would receive the best.

This is what causes the problem, young adults of my age who are brought up in such an environment are often found to be taking things for granted. It is no longer about how late you come home, but about how many days your parents have not seen you. The rubber bands are already pulling at its furthest, but yet we are still yearning for more.

Zooming in to the situation we see, many young people voted that the best solution is to simply bid their parents adieu and strike out on their own. That is when they can experience a period of growth, independence, freedom and stepping into adulthood. But reality is how many are really prepared and capable to move out.

Apart from money issues, I am sure there are factors which relates back to our culture, background and personality that are affecting our perceptions which in turn hold us back.

Dating back, our asian culture is that we only move out after marriage. Comparing to the Westerners, Asian's thinking are certainly more conservative and chooses to walk on the safest side of the road. Many parents feel that wanting to move out for the sake of freedom and independence is unnecessary, ironically, they started questioning back if the house is not providing and treating you good enough.

The environment and ways we are brought up also influence our mindsets. As stated above, many of us are blessed to be brought up in a condusive and well provided environment, and therefore does not see the need to sacrifice whatever they have now.

Lastly, the biggest thing that I consider about is how the parents might feel. The game should not only involve a selfish individual. After so many years of hardship to bring a child up, putting up with all the little and big nonsense we gave, though not expecting much in return, who would bear the thought of the child moving out once his wings are grown.

I don't deny, after seeing many of my friends who came alone to Singapore for their studies, I dream about it too. But there are too many cons over the pros if I were to weigh them all out. Most probably because my mum does a very good job in showing me that life can't get any better with her around in the house and I am in really close terms with her. Plus since my dad is not with us, I feel the responsibility to be around her.

Now the debate is: Putting aside money issues, would you still want to move out once you hit 21? Why? Let's share our views (:

I am dying to move out of my parents' house

"now that I've turned 21, however, these seemingly trivial squabbles have suddenly become an issue of personal freedom and space"-CLEO, free speech by Selina Leong

I came across an article in the recent cleo magazine and found it an interesting enough topic to begin with. Why? Because my audience are mostly at the age of being a young adult, reaching the point whereby we hope to be treated somehow differently, whereby freedom and space becomes a big issue between the parents and us.

The situation I've observed is no longer about how late you come home, but about how many days your parents have not seen you. The rubber bands are already pulling at its furthest, but yet we are still yearning for more.

To most of us, moving out represents a period of growth, independence, freedom and stepping into adulthood. Besides the fact that we can finally eat fast food for every meal, club the whole night and come back dead drunk, wearing our socks for three consecutive days etc.
Will we suddenly too realise the heap of unwashed clothes piling up, the missing mum's famous homecooked meals and some warm yakking voices?

The writer wrote that many young people today simply can't wait to bid their parents adieu and strike out on their own. I know, who doesn't fancy the thought of having their own little space?

Many that I asked told me that money is the thing that stopped them from moving out. But I am sure there are factors which relates back to our culture, background and personality that are really holding us back. Comparing to the Westerners, Asian's thinking are certainly more conservative and chooses to walk on the safest side of the road. The environment and ways we are brought up also influence our mindsets.

To me, the biggest thing that I consider about is how the parents might feel. After so many years of hardship to bring a child up, putting up with all the little and big nonsense we gave, though not expecting much in return, who would bear the thought of the child moving out once his wings are grown.

I don't deny, after seeing many of my friends who came alone to Singapore for their studies, I dream about it too. But there are too many cons over the pros if I were to weigh them all out. Most probably because my mum does a very good job in showing me that life can't get any better with her around in the house and I am in really close terms with her. Plus since my dad is not with us, I feel the responsibility to be around her.

Now, the debate here is: Would you move out once you hit 21 if money wasn't going to be an issue? why? Lets share our views. (:

-sources from CLEO magazine and jupiter images.