I will like you to watch both videos carefully.
When you are ready, I invite you to comment on your reactions to these videos, taking into consideration these points:
- What is the purpose of these videos?
- What assumptions / implications are made by these videos?
- What else can the mass media do besides raise awareness?
- Is raising awareness enough?
Please leave your comments by Sunday 19 April 2009
A Day in the life of Kaisong
Teenage Affluenza
Best wishes
Mr Low
1. Both videos actually documenting about poverty in the world. Even though the 'Teenage Affluenza' does not evidently state about poverty, it is trying to create an irony to highlight the major difference between poverty and affluence.
ReplyDelete2. The video 'A Day in the Life of Kaisong' is implying that kids in Laos are poor, which is not the case. 40% of the kids in Laos are in desperate poverty, the other 60% may not be living in these conditions. The video also assumes that the 40% in desperate poverty are in the same plight as Kaisong, which is false. Some may be a little better off while others may not. The video 'Teenage Affluenza' assumes that living on less than A$40 weekly is a characteristic of poverty. This is definitely untrue because many people all over the world live on less than that but aren't poor.
3. Besides creating awareness, the mass media can also help to garner support for the fight against poverty, like the 2 videos above. They are actually publicizing to garner support for the 40 hour famine camp. Also organizations can utilize the mass media to raise funds for these poor people. An example of such an organization is 'Make Poverty History'. They encourage people to take action and fight against poverty. They even endorse celebrities to help as well. Such is the power of the Mass Media.
4. Of course words without actions are dead. Other than raising awareness, campaigning needs to take place. People need to be physically and mentally involved in order to help fight against poverty.
Poverty is real. It needs to be dealt with immediately because the children and families cannot wait, or else they'll be trapped in the vicious cycle forever.
Purpose: In the first video, the author aims to prod at our guilt and pull at our heart strings. He is showing us how poor people are in Lao's. While the second video, trys to compare what people in Australia and the people in Lao's everyday challenges. It aims to ridicule the people in the "developed countries" as their worries and complaints are minute when compared to the hardships of people in Lao's.
ReplyDeleteAssumptions: The first video assumes that every family in Lao's is as dysfunctional and poor as Kaisongs family. The second video assumes that everyone in Australia count - Walking to school, not being able to sit in the front seat of the car, not having a big bed, not having the latest technology - as an issue or problem.
What else can MM do?
The mass media can start encouraging people to start donating money to transparent charities which actually use the money to help the poor. Publicity for people who have contributed generously and those who have made efforts to do community work in the poor countries.
Raising awareness is definetly not enough in our struggle to aid people in desperate need. Although it plays a significant role in educating the public, certain measures need to be put in place to ensure that people come forward to contribute.
1. Both of the videos are talking about poverty in the world, but in different context. In the first video, it is showing us how terrible life is in Laos and how poverty robbed a girl of her rights to learn and play like a child of her age should. In the second video, it shows us the contridictory fact of what children in Australia thinks is poverty as compared to what the children in Laos are really facing. It ridicules the children in more economically developed countries.
ReplyDelete2. The first video assumes that all the families are living in extreme poverty like Kaisong's family. While the second video assumes that all the children in Australia feels that using outdated things is sad and is a major issue.
3. The Mass Media can encourage people to donate money to the poor and also encourage people to go to the less developed countries themselves and help them to build houses, bring food for them and teach the children.
4. Raising awareness is not enough to help all the poor people. If people are aware of such things but do not have the opportunity to help, all the efforts in raising awareness will be to waste. Donations and mission work should be more prominent, making it easier for people to help the less economically developed countries.
What is the purpoes of these videos?
ReplyDeleteBy showcasing the tragic life of a young child suffering under the harsh effects of poverty, the video aims to raise awareness to the public by gaining their sympathy for these children in Laos. The second video aims to show what exactly is considered as "poverty" in Australia.
What assumptions/implications are made by these videos?
It is assuming that almost every child in Laos are suffering due to poverty. However, this is not the case. As Samantha has mentioned, only 40% of children in Laos are suffering due to poverty but the other 60% may be living luxurious lives. For the second video, it is assumed that australian children take things for granted and do not realise that what they already have are considered to be luxuries for others.
What else can the mass media do besides raising awareness?
Besides raising awareness, the mass media could perhaps publicize on the measures people could follow to help these children in need. The mass media can also gather more support from the public by encouraging them into taking the initiative towards aiding poverty for such places. The mass media could also help in changing people's mindset of poverty. In the second video, it appears that the young australian teenager isnt getting enough of what she think she essentially needs. However, in comparison with the first video, this young teenager is already considered to be living a life of luxury.
Is raising awareness enough?
It is definitely not enough! Raising awareness only informs the public on the current situation of poverty in these countries but it does not help in encouraging these people to do their part in aiding poverty in a certain way. Certain measures or events, like what the video is promoting (the 40hour famine camp) should take place in order to interest more people into taking the initiative to step up and voluntarily offer their help to aid these children from poverty.
Purpose?
ReplyDelete1st video is to bring awareness about what poverty is really like in another country, Laos. The 2nd video is to compare what children in Australia feel is poverty, to what poverty really is.
Assumptions?
The 1st video assumes that the whole country is living in poverty like KaiSong’s family. The 2nd video, assumes that everyone in Australia feels that walking 125 steps to their first class, carrying groceries and having outdated toys are considered as poverty
What else can the Mass Media do to raise awareness?
Arrange trips to these undeveloped countries experiencing poverty to let the world know first hand what it is like. Organise charity shows that portray the lives of these people. Rise awareness of the different organisations/ charities that have programmes to help these people.
Is raising awareness enough?
Raising awareness only plays a minor role in help these people that are living in poverty. This is due to whether we, are willing to play a role in helping them after learning about their plight or, will we just turn a blind eye and act like normal. Besides raising awareness, which is the 1st step, we must also take part in the different programmes offered by different organisations and help the programmes to work out. For example, donating old clothes, not wasting food and living simply. Therefore, solely rasing awareness is definitely not enough and we must also take a more active role in helping the people in poverty.
1) The purpose of these videos is to show us the difference in the lifestyles of those who live in less developed countries and those who live in developed countries. The videos show us how children in Laos live in extreme poverty and how teenagers in Australia live in what they feel, is an uncomfortable lifestyle. This shows us a contrasting difference in the different lifestyles. The videos also convey the message to us that we should do something real like participating in the 40 hour famine. This is because by doing so, we will be helping children in loas like Kaisong to build a better future. World vision will help villagers grow nutritious food and get access to clean water and sanitation for the long term. Every $40 collected will help fed and care for children like Kaisong for one month.
ReplyDelete2) The assumption made by video 1 is that all the children in Laos live like Kaisong, in extreme poverty. However, there are other parts in Laos where the people are better off. As Samantha and Shayne have mentioned, 40% of the children live in extreme poverty and the other 60% may not be. Also, not all of the 40% living in extreme poverty live life like Kaisong. Not all families have 5 members. Some may have less and not all their mothers may be blind. Therefore, not all children who live in extreme poverty live like Kaisong and her family.
The assumption made by video 2 is that all teenagers in Australia feel the same way as Erin and her siblings when it comes to being “poor.” The video assumes that all teenagers in Australia are not contented with what they have. This includes a roof over their head, food on their plate and a school to go to receive education. The video also assumes that the teenagers in Australia feel that living on less than $40 a week is considered poor and that is not true as I personally can live on that much a week if I have to.
3) Besides raising awareness, The Mass Media can promote events such as The 40 Hour Famine, which it did, so that people can actually contribute and do something to fight poverty which is a major problem in developing countries. Other organizations which are also holding events such as a fund raising projects to fight poverty in less developed countries, can use the mass media as a medium to advertise the event to the masses. This way, people can take initiative to help fight poverty.
4) NO, absolutely not. Raising awareness is not enough because if people are just told about the effects and impacts of poverty and they don’t do anything about it, then there is no use as the problem of poverty will still exist. People need to be physically involved in events in order to fully curb the problem of world poverty. As Tracy has mentioned, they need to take part in activities organized by different groups in order to fight the worldwide problem of poverty.
1)Purpose of the two videos:
ReplyDelete~ *For the first video, it shows us that there are many people out there in the developing country, who are fighting to survive in their own ways. The first video is also probing on the audience heartstrings to donate money and help the people in those countries.*
~ *For the second video, it shows us that people have different standards of needs for survival. For example, in laos, we just need the basics such as shelter, food, water. However in the second video, the purpose of the video is to show the different standards of survival due to the development of the country.*
2)Assumptions/implication made:
~ *For the first video, one possible assumptions made is that every single person living in the developing countries are suffering like how Kaisong is experiencing poverty.*
~ *For the second video, the assumption made is that all the people in the slightly more developed countries felt the same ways as how it is stated in the second video.*
3)What else could the mass media do?
~ *the mass media could help by showing how the people in those countries actually survive and urge us to donate simple things to them. Eg. money, clothes etc. The mass media could also raise funds and orgaise charity shows.*
4)Is raising awareness enough?
~ *raising awareness is definitely not enough. To me, raising awareness is just plain words but not the actions done. Help should be provided to those people after having the awareness that these people are suffering from poverty. Hence, raising awareness is not enough.*
Purpose:
ReplyDelete1st video
The purpose of this video was to inform the public about how poor people in Laos live in poverty. It's purpose was also to raise awareness about poverty and encourage people to sign up for the 40-hour famine programme.
2nd video:
In the second video, the purpose is to show how people of different levels of income live. It also aims to drive home the point that we are much more fortunate than many other people in the world.
Assumptions:
1st video
The assumption this video made was that every poor person lead lives like Kaisong. However, this is not true as there are variations in the level of poverty among people around the world. It also assumes that by signing up for the 40-hour famine programme, the money collected will be distributed evenly among the poor.
2nd video
The assumption the video makes is that all teenagers in Australia are unhappy with their life and that they are unaware of the suffering going around in the world. It implies that these teenagers are selfish and materialistic.
What else can the mass media do:
Apart from raising awareness, the mass media could popularize charity work.
Is raising awareness enough:
No. Raising awareness means that the people know that there are many who live in abject poverty. This does not mean that they will automatically help these poor people. No matter how aware you are of the situation, if no action is taken, nothing changes. Hence, raising awareness is definitely not enough.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHelloo.
ReplyDeleteKaisong video:
This video is to advertise the 40 hour famine camp in a bid to attract more volunteers to join this effort in raising the awareness of the dificulties faced by those living in poverty and to contribute in improving their lives. Assumptions made here are that people aren't fully aware of the conditions in which poverty-stricken people live in, that this famine camp can help improve their lives and that the kids in Laos are generally living like Kaisong-suffering and helpless. This video implies that Laos' government is not helping its citizens in easing poverty, that people struck by poverty cannot get themselves out of it and that the rest of the public are not doing enough in helping to reduce poverty in Laos.
Australian affluenza Video:
I really liked this video because the sarcasm implemented creates a strong impact on viewers. It's purpose is to encourage people to really stand up and contribute to eradicating poverty instead of living in their own world by participating in the 40 hour famine camp. It has such a strong message behind it. It implies that people who lead stable lives with proper housing, proper education etc are ungrateful for what they have and are ignorant to the plight of many others who live in poverty. Also, it assumes that a majority are ignorant to this fact and that not enough is being done to ease poverty-stricken people's sufferings. It especially assumes that the younger generation in Australia these days are spoilt, complaining about trivial things as compared to what children living in poverty have to go through everyday.
Can the mass media do more? I think yes. They can be the direct link tbetween the stable income people and those living in poverty. For example, they can advertise hotlines that allow donations made by the public to be collected for poverty-stricken people. Therefore, instead of just raising awareness, they can also be there, readily available, for those who wants to 'do something real' straight away.
I think that all of us here agree that raising awareness is not enough in eradicating poverty but it is an important step. By doing so, the audience are enouraged to help people living in poverty, hence, increasing the amount of donations etc. But if these aren't executed and given out to the right people, all that effort will go to waste. Proper guidance and trusted sponsors/charity groups are important as well. The proceeds have to be given under the responsibility of those who genuinely care. Or else, how would those poor people get their maximized much-needed help?
What is the purpose of these videos?
ReplyDeleteFirst video: the purpose of this video is to encourage people to sign up for the 40-hour famine camp. it is attention grabbing and an eye-opener to the more ignorant viewers. it toils with the emotion of the viewer by creating an impact when it depicts the difficulties the people in laos face.
Second video: The purpose of this video is to make people aware that our(people in the more developed countries) complaints and hardships are extremely miniscule as compared to the people living in the third world countries. the author uses mockery and sarcasm to emphasise the contrast between the people in the first world country(australia) and those in the third world(laos).
What assumptions / implications are made by these videos?
First video:
Implication: the implication here is that nothing has been done to eradicate poverty in laos.
Assumption: the assumption here is that everyone in laos live in extreme poverty. this video was taken in the more rural area of laos. the people in the urban areas may live in a more convenient environment.
Second video:
Implications: the people in the first world country are unappreciative of what they have, taking everything for granted. they 'want' more than they 'need'.
Assumption: Everyone in the first world country behaves that way- ungrateful of what they have and wants more than what they need.
What else can the mass media do besides raise awareness? the mass media can play an important role in organising charities and encouraging people to donate. it can act as a channel between the richer and the poor. they can show how people can help the poor.
Is raising awareness enough? i agree with sabila that it is an important step in eradicating poverty. it motivates people to combat poverty. actions speak louder than words. by raising awareness, it will create a controversy and allow for better government in the poverty-stricken country, which will further alleviate poverty. donations, charities, medical help from other countries will also help mitigate the problem.
My reaction: the videos are very thought-provoking. the second video really grabs my attention when they compared how different the lives of the 'rich' and the poor. the definition of poor is very different in different countries. there is different degree of poverty in the world. it shows how insignificant the daily hardships of a first world country is as compared to a third world country.
The purpose of these two videos is to show viewers, the differences in what people think is poverty. What is shown in the first video reflects upon the harsh conditions some families live in Laos. Without proper shelter, clean water access, and food. What is seen can be considered to be poverty. In the second video, viewers are shown the unhappiness of an Australian girl with her life. Even though she has all the necessities she needs plus more, what she has is little compared to her peers. In showing viewers this, there is an attempt to let known the unequal world we live in.
ReplyDeleteThe first video assumes that every family living in Laos is living lives similar to that of Kaisong’s family. This is not the case as there are better off places in Laos that are relatively more developed, and where better off families reside.
The second video assumes that children in developed countries always want something better, and are constantly unhappy with their lot.
The mass media could take the initiative by donating a portion of their revenue to those living in poverty. Alternatively, the mass media could try uncovering the reasons as to why so many people are living in poverty.
Raising awareness alone is not enough. Most people, apart from the usual sympathising, do not bother to do more. Poverty has plagued the world for centuries, what needs to be done is something constant. Help has to be given by anyone capable. In fact, it should be made a law that big corporations donate.
Purpose:
ReplyDelete1st video- aims to show the state of poverty that is evident in Laos, how families do not have the proper essentials for survival. It also aims to tug heart strings and encourage viewers to participate in the famine camp.
2nd video- also aims to enocourage viewers to participate in the camp, however, apart from showing snippets of how poverty is in other countries, they also show how the definition of "suffering" in developed countries pales in comparison to that of less developed countries. There is a Chinese saying that one lives in prosperity yet does not know it (shen zai fu zhong bu zhi fu). This is shown to be very true in the video.
Assumptions:
1st video- That every family in Laos is living in such conditions. This is not true as there are other families who are better off.
2nd video- That every child is spoiled till the point that they think what they have is not enough. This is not true as not all child is spoiled and uncontent with their lives.
What mass media can do other than raise awareness:
Take the first step by donating to those in poverty, have more charity drives to get people to donate to those in poverty
Is raising awareness enough:
Raising awareness is never enough. As Mahatma Gandhi once said, "You must be the change you want to see in the world". Instead of being sympathetic for them, why not actually do something about it? Do regular charity work and donate to the poor.
Poverty is a very vicious cycle, it will never stop unless something is done.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePurpose?
ReplyDeleteBoth videos address a similar issue - Poverty. However, the first is directed at not just poverty, but abject poverty, to people like Kaisong in Laos. Whereas the second video is directed to people in other more developed countires and what they deem poverty to be. By comparing both situations, it(2nd video) sets to illustrate to its viewers what poverty really is and also to encourage people to support the 40 hour famine camp.
Assumptions?
The first video assumes that everyone in Laos lives in abject poverty.
the second video assumes that all teenagers are unappreciative of what they have.
What else can the mass media do besides raise awareness?
The mass media cannot do much besides raising awareness. Promoting and advertising are all parts of increasing awareness of the people in the world. It is no doubt up to us, the 'unaffected' people, to play a part, lend a helping hand and make a difference.
Is raising awareness enough?
No, words without actions are meaningless. If awareness were to be raised and yet people are still indifferent to what is happening around them because they are not affected, then all efforts to raise awareness would come to naught.
A good example of putting words into actions is the 'Food for Work' programme executed by the United Nations World Food programme (WFP). People in poorer nations for instance, Somalia, are given food in return for work such as the building of irrigation facilities and proper roads. This not only helps to improve the infrastructure and output of the country but also, earn these people some skills that can be used for survival.
i) Purpose
ReplyDeleteThere are two purposes of the videos. First of all, the videos were made intended to raise the awareness of poverty worldwide. Next, the videos also had the purpose of encouraging people living in developed countries to appreciate what they already have, and to do their part in helping out the poor children like Kaisong.
ii) Assumptions & Implications
Even though the videos had the purpose of encouraging people to do their part in aiding to alleviate poverty, it also appeared to be mocking at children and teenagers living in the developed countries. Thus, the creators of the videos were assuming that teenagers living in developed countries(such as Australia in the case of the video) are living a comfortable life. They are neglecting the fact that there are people living in poverty even in a developed country itself. Furthermore, by closely comparing the teenager's lifestyle in Australia against Kaisong's lifestyle, the video was implying that teenagers living in developed countries cannot stand hardships.
iii) What else can the mass media do besides raising awareness?
There are many things the mass media can do besides raising awareness. As usual, the media can organise shows,concerts and events by inviting famous artists from around the world to perform, and proceeds will go towards helping the poor children in poorer nations. They may also hold competitions that can not only benefit the public but also help the poor children.
iv) Is raising awareness enough?
Raising awareness alone is definitely not enough as the impact on the public will minor. People will be aware of the prevalence of poverty yet nothing would be done. Instead of airing documentaries after documentaries, the media could in fact organise outreach programmes annually that involve the public. That in my opinion would be much more practical.
Natasya
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of these videos is to increase people’s awareness on poverty. It reminds people that while they live such comfortable lives, there are millions out there who do not. By doing this, such people start to appreciate their situation better.
The assumption made in the first video is that no effort has been made by the government or non-governmental organisations to reduce the poverty in Laos. Kaisong’s family situation is also used as a general representation of the many families living in extreme poverty in Laos. It implies that their situation is getting worse by the day and if no help is given to them, this poverty cycle will continue. In the second video the assumption made is that teenagers/children in developed countries are unaware of the terrible living situations in 3rd world countries. It implies that such teenagers/children are unconcerned and unfazed by the suffering faced by those living in poverty.
The mass media can form charities where money donated can be sent to poverty-stricken places. It can involve the masses in the movement to abolish poverty by organising community service visits to such countries.
Today, the mass media is a powerful instrument which has influence people all over. Raising awareness through the mass media, is the first step to making poverty extinct. Raising awareness, though essential, is not enough. If everyone were to contribute in their own ways, be it small gestures like $2 donations or large ones like setting up schools in Africa, their contributions would slowly but surely discontinue the harsh poverty cycle.
What is the purpose of these videos?
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of these videos are to show how lucky all of us are, that we are all clothed well, and that we have access to clean water and sanitation unlike KaiSong's family (First Video). It is also to promote and encourage people to sign up for the 40 Hour Famine Project.
What assumptions / implications are made by these videos?
They are assuming that everyone living in Laos are all suffering from poverty. There are also poor people living in Developed Countries though there, lesser of them as compared to Laos.
They are trying to imply that people living in Developed Countries will not be able to survive under conditions like KaiSong's.
What else can the mass media do besides raise awareness?
The Mass Media can collaborate with charitable organisations to raise funds for the people living in poverty, instead of just spreading awareness all around when nothing is done.
Is raising awareness enough?
No, it is not. Action speak louder than words. Effort and action must be put in, in order to improve the living conditions of these people.
Something must be done to eradicate poverty, and only then can the living conditions of these people change for the better.
1. What is the purpose of these videos?
ReplyDeleteVideo 1:
Using the example of little Kaisong, Vid1’s intention is to get the world’s attention onto the existing poverty in less developed countries like Laos. At the same time, they are using the tragic life (probably exaggerated) of Kaisong to advertise “40 Hour Famine”.
Video 2:
The differing perceptions of poverty in the MEDCs and in the LEDCs. By comparing the Australian family with the Laos family, it somehow ridicules how people in the MEDC have totally redefined the concept of poverty.
2. What assumptions / implications are made by these videos?
Video 1:
Every single kid in Laos is in the same pathetic state as Kaisong. By simply participating in the “40 Hour Famine”, kids like Kaisong can “have a better future”.
Video 2:
Every Australian kid is equally unappreciative of what they have.
3. What else can the mass media do besides raise awareness?
Raising awareness aside, the MM has a big part to play in terms of getting the masses’ involvement in programmes such as the 40 Hour Famine. By advertising it, the MM not only raised awareness of the poverty in Laos, but also encouraged the privileged to take part in the project.
Taking the example of the 40 Hour Famine ads, the MM first raised the public’s awareness of poverty in Laos, before encouraging people to participate.
4. Is raising awareness enough?
No way is it enough. Agreeing with Natasha and many others, further actions must take place to enforce the awareness. Without any follow-up, the awareness will gradually fade into indifference.
Knowing about poverty and doing something about it are different.
1. The purpose of these two videos is to highlight the contrast of what is perceived as living in poverty in the less economically developed countries(LEDCs) and in the more economically developed countries(MEDCs). In the first video, living in poverty in a LEDC is described vividly by harsh living conditions such as a lack of proper shelter, inaccessibilty to clean water and an inadequate intake of food and nutrition. All these living conditions consistently show people in poverty are fighting for survival as they are not even provided with basic needs for a healthy lifestyle. However, in the second video, living in poverty in MEDC is seen as one having all basic living needs covered but are still constantly unhappy about their standard of living. People living in poverty in the second video are unappreciative about what they already have and are always constantly complaining and striving to become better.
ReplyDelete2. In the first video, an assumption is made that everyone who live in a LEDC is poor and that they are all fighting against all odds to survive. Also, the campaign to encourage people for join the famine camp seems to be assumed as the solution for all these people who are living in poverty. In the second video, it is assumed that everyone who lives in a MEDC is unable to appreciate with their lot and are always unhappy and striving for more.
3. The MM can definitely do more to encourage the privileged to donate money to the poor, helping them to come out of their poverty. To constantly contribute to cultivate a trend whereby the more priviledged will see a pressing need to help the poor.
4. No, it is not enough. By raising awareness, most people will only sympathesise with the poor and in most cases, they will not be motivated to step out to help. Efficient schemes and follow-ups should be put in place for the public whom is generally more well-to-do to make sure that something is done to help the poor come out of their poverty.