Universal

NBC Universal has unveiled plans to launch 20 new television channels around the world, including local versions of Sci-Fi, in a bid to more than double revenues from its global networks division over the next three years.

The media and entertainment giant said it was rolling out channels in 23 new countries across Europe, Asia and Latin America. The plans form part of a three-pronged strategy by new NBC Universal chief executive Jeff Zucker to focus on international growth alongside producing new programmes and making more of digital.

It echoes moves by a host of American media companies keen to exploit fast-growing markets like India and Eastern Europe as their own market in the US becomes increasingly saturated.

Under the overseas push, existing NBC Universal channel brands, including Sci-Fi, action and suspense channel 13th Street and the crime-focused Universal Channel, will launch into new markets across Asia, eastern Europe, Russia and India. Other countries set to get new channels this year and next include Portugal, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Turkey.

The move will almost double the group's number of local channels to reach a total of 58 countries - from 35 now - beginning with the launch of Sci-Fi in Latin America and Sci-Fi and 13th Street in the Netherlands.

Peter Smith, who runs all the group's non-US operations out of London said the "ambitious growth plan" was tapping into new opportunities from international pay-TV markets.

"We have the experience and resource to begin a targeted launch programme in priority markets, including wider distribution and more local production in the countries where we operate," he said.

"We look to markets with growing digital subscriber bases, emerging pay-television consumption, new platforms and new technologies."

NBC Universal's filmed entertainment, networks and cable television operations generated total international revenues of almost $3bn (£1.51bn) last year.

My Opinion: This will be a good idea, and Universal can pay their staff much more than they are already if they earn atleast twice as much. Also, they will become a bigger company than they already are.

In 'Faulty Towers' - a hugely successful sitcom of the 1970's - the Other (the object that is being stereotyped because of fear about its difference from established norms and its challenge to the dominany ideology) is the Germans, who are ridiculed by John Cleese in his role as Basil Fawlty in his memorable "funny walk" =. However, in 'The Beano' also very successful - one of the longest runnig comics in the uk - and sharing the same funamental purpose as 'Fawlty Towers' (to entertain the audience by making them laugh) it is a 'typical' girl being stereo-typed by 'The Bast Street Kids', derided for being narcissitic. In each case, the Other is determined by the producers' assumption about what will appeal to the target audience, tapping into their core beliefs and values, and these representations ultimately help to reinforce their conservative prejudices - their rascism ans sexism.

At the time of 'Text 1', Britain was still suffering from the painful memory of the Second World War (and perhaps still is today judginf by Richard Desmond's politically incorrect behaviour last week at a meeting between his 'Daily Express' newspaper group and 'The Daily Telegraph') and so it satisfied a generation of British people who were still unsure about our former enemies, even though the programme - makers' intention had been to satirise these attitudes as being outdated.

Similarly, 'Text 2' demonstrates how even in out post - feminist times, the pre-teen boys who make up the primary audience of 'The Beano' have little respect for the girls and will strongly identify with the views f the main characters who assert and 'prove' that traditional femininity is no match for masculine qualities. However, by placing a female 'tomboy' character as one of the cheif proponents of this patriarchal view, it could be argued that 'The Beano' is quite a progressive text because it nevertheless makes it clear that gender identity is not fixed or laid down according to biology. Whether boys will pick up on this message or - like the reactionary sitcom audience of the 1970's - instead take a more alternative reading from the prefferred one, is a matter for debate.

Although both these comics appear to be funny in their context and appeal to their target audience, they both difrentiate in terms of the way they are presented to the audience, how and why, and what values they are teaching their audience as both appeal to very disimilar audiences. Text 1, appears to be appealing to a middle class British audience as the character seems to have an unusual sence of humour as he is mocking the world war, and is seen to be derisive toward the Germans. Therefore, the character is representing the British.

On the other hand, 'The Beano' is innocently representing troublesome children, who do not shed value for anything but themselves. Therefore, portraying them to by jealous. This is shown by the fact that the little girl is constantly unhappy with her friend finding a girlfriend, who we see is taking advantage of him, as she asks him to take her out shopping. This again is representing a female to be selfish. Because, 'The Beano' primarily targets the male audience, and the ages of who they provide for is that of 11 - 14 year old. The new girl at school is also conforming to the 'Male Gaze' theory as she is seen to be beautiful, with long blonde hair, whereas the other female character does not appeal to the gaze. The illustrator of this comic, is representing girls to only find good looking boys attractive, therefore assuming they are shallow.

Finally, both these texts are very diverse, as they are targeting different audiences, they appear to be comedys in their own context and therefore, for different audiences they are interpreted differently. therefore i would find Text 1 more funny, than Text 2, as i am past that age and so i am more likely to respond positivley to one which fits my age range.

Sir Richard Branson, Sponsoring Big Brother.

At the press conference to announce the merger of Virgin Mobile with NTL last year, Sir Richard Branson brandished a red pen and scrawled on the rather dull presentation that the deal was all about 4-play. While on the surface his graffiti was an attempt to inject a bit of spice into an otherwise dull meeting of suits, it also underlined the idea behind the deal: that Virgin Media would be a one-stop content provider across TV, the web and mobile.

Until now, however, there has been little evidence that 4-play has got anyone excited. Virgin's customer growth has stagnated while the cable TV operation has become bogged down in a spat with Sky over the provision of the satellite broadcaster's basic channels.

But confirmation that Virgin Media is taking up the sponsorship of Big Brother, dropped by Carphone Warehouse after the Celebrity race row, offers the company the perfect opportunity to prove that multi-platform content can work.

When mobile phone company O2 sponsored the first few Big Brother series it produced a host of mobile content such as wallpapers and news from the house.

Since then, mobile handsets have evolved: many can deal with video and access the internet, paving the way for similar content to be accessed through both mobiles and PCs.

Virgin also has a mobile phone in the market which can receive live TV transmissions, and plans to launch more TV handsets later this year.

The question is, however, whether Channel 4 and Endemol will allow Virgin Media to use Big Brother as a showcase or just pocket Branson's cash while they continue to work on their own digital plans for the show.

My Opinion:

I'm not too sure this is a good idea. This is because, if another insident like what has already happend with Jade Goody and Shilpa Shetty, the bad publicity will be rubbed off onto Virgin. It's a risk that Virgin will want to take. Also, BB aims for a younger audience, where as Virgin aim for more of a middle aged audience. For example, Carphone Warehouse advertise phones that are appealing to a younger audience, like something flashy, new and with different gadgets, whereas Virgin Mobile advertise business, simple phones with can only usually make calls. This will not work as both organisations are very disimilar. Also, recently, BB has become really divisive and plenty of people don't like it!..Therefore Richard Branson is taking a risk of sponsoring them!

Sir Richard Branson, Sponsoring Big Brother.

At the press conference to announce the merger of Virgin Mobile with NTL last year, Sir Richard Branson brandished a red pen and scrawled on the rather dull presentation that the deal was all about 4-play. While on the surface his graffiti was an attempt to inject a bit of spice into an otherwise dull meeting of suits, it also underlined the idea behind the deal: that Virgin Media would be a one-stop content provider across TV, the web and mobile.

Until now, however, there has been little evidence that 4-play has got anyone excited. Virgin's customer growth has stagnated while the cable TV operation has become bogged down in a spat with Sky over the provision of the satellite broadcaster's basic channels.

But confirmation that Virgin Media is taking up the sponsorship of Big Brother, dropped by Carphone Warehouse after the Celebrity race row, offers the company the perfect opportunity to prove that multi-platform content can work.

When mobile phone company O2 sponsored the first few Big Brother series it produced a host of mobile content such as wallpapers and news from the house.

Since then, mobile handsets have evolved: many can deal with video and access the internet, paving the way for similar content to be accessed through both mobiles and PCs.

Virgin also has a mobile phone in the market which can receive live TV transmissions, and plans to launch more TV handsets later this year.

The question is, however, whether Channel 4 and Endemol will allow Virgin Media to use Big Brother as a showcase or just pocket Branson's cash while they continue to work on their own digital plans for the show.

My Opinion:

I'm not too sure this is a good idea. This is because, if another insident like what has already happend with Jade Goody and Shilpa Shetty, the bad publicity will be rubbed off onto Virgin. It's a risk that Virgin will want to take. Also, BB aims for a younger audience, where as Virgin aim for more of a middle aged audience. This will not work as both organisations are very disimilar. Also, recently, BB has become really divisive and plenty of people don't like it!..Therefore Richard Branson is taking a risk of sponsoring them!

Attainment

I would give myself a 2 for attainment, i may not be the brightest of the class, but i am definately trying to achieve higher grades this year!

Effort

Honestly, i could say, a 1 is fair for my effort, i put in a lot of hard work into my homework, and my class work. i have also posted up extra essays, which mr bush u havent marked yet lol..if you do get round to it, please do =)

Punctuality

Im always on time, and in lesson, so mr bush nor mr munro can say im never there. Mr munro would argue that i have missed the occasionall lesson..for an open day or something..even mr bush, but i do always make sure i come for the homework set, or the work in that lesson..so i would give myself a 1..ok maybe a 2..

Submission and quality of homework

defo a 1..i ALWAYS without fail do my homework!!

Ability to work independently

Hmm..probably a 2 for this as i am not yet enjoying working alone..

Quality of writing

Im geting beta..but il stil say im a 2..

Organisation of Media folder

ommmg! a 1..and its always with me in lessons!!

Oral contributions in class

hmm..2

Quality of coursework

hmmm..dont really know!! =( this is a hard one...hmmmm..mmm...2!

Standard of Med 5 blog

hmm.. i aynt done a lot recently, BUT il give myself a 2 =)

Standard of Module 6 blog (Year 13s only)

oooo excellent :D 1 !!

Go Four Posts Down, And You Will See What I Had To Say About Prascilla's Essay =) ..

Blue Peter legend Biddy Baxter said she was "appalled" by the revelation of a fake phone-in competition result on the BBC kids' show.

Baxter, who was in charge of Blue Peter from the 60s to the 80s, put the mistake down to "human frailty" and said that she did not think that anyone should be sacked over the incident.
Last night, Blue Peter presenters issued an on-air apology to viewers after 14,000 children entered the contest to win a toy - but due to technical problems the programme asked a girl visiting the studio to pose as the winner.

Speaking on a host of BBC radio and TV programmes this morning, Ms Baxter said she was "absolutely dumbstruck and then very annoyed".

"What one has to remember is we have to differentiate between the phone scams which are deliberate and premeditated and this ghastly thing that happened on Blue Peter," she said.
"Really it was a mixture of panic and inexperience because what happened was the person in charge of the item was on the floor. Phone lines went down, live transmission - panic, panic, panic.

"The irony was up in the gallery was the editor and the assistant editor completely oblivious of what was going on, and this member of the production team picked out one of the children in the studio and took them into the make-up area and that's how it happened."
She said that she hoped that the programme recovered from the scandal.

"I do hope Blue Peter will win back the trust of the viewers because it was human frailty. We are all liable to do something stupid and unfortunately that's what happened."

Mona Zahoor, who was at the Blue Peter studio with her son, Ali, on the day of the phone-in competition, told BBC Breakfast she had inadvertently revealed that the programme had faked the winner.

"On the day we were just visiting the Blue Peter studios and they had a phone-in competition," Ms Zahoor said.

"Towards the end of it, surprisingly, rather than a genuine caller calling, one of the children who was behind the set at the time was plucked out and asked to pretend to be a caller.
"I happened to be on the BBC message board on Friday and, while people had written these things had happened on various programmes, I added that it had happened on Blue Peter as well, just assuming people must have known this was just something I was adding to a message board."

TV standards campaigners said faking a winner on a children's TV show marked a new low in the phone-in scandal which has affected the likes of Richard and Judy, Saturday Kitchen and The X Factor. "This is a clear breach of audience trust and is made so much worse because this is a long-running programme for children. The BBC ought to know better," said Dave Turtle of pressure group Mediawatch UK.

My View:

Personally, being a fan of blue peter myself, i was appalled at the fact that blue peter felt they had to lie about the winner of the phone in competition, and the amount of money which they had raised. Blue Peter have the audience of ages between 6 - 11, and what Blue Peter did set a poor example for these children, Blue Peter should be very apolagetic towards the situation.

"I do hope Blue Peter will win back the trust of the viewers because it was human frailty. We are all liable to do something stupid and unfortunately that's what happened."

Halloween and Slasher genre – Essay

Halloween, directed by John Carpenter, was a strongly influenced film in terms of the slasher genre for film, and one of the first, which there after created a boom in slasher genre films. Therefore, we know that Halloween was one of the first ever slasher films to be made. However, this film typically, like any other follows conventions from that of Hitchcock’s movie “Psycho”.

Repetition of iconography, such as women screaming excessively, suggested the fear within the protagonist. The fact that a dagger – like knife was used in Halloween suggests that this was copied from the movie “Psycho” as Hitchcock originally uses a knife, in order for the killer to kill the protagonist. The fact that the knife was used, is represented as a phallic symbol as it is large, and long shows intimate contact and the killer would need to intimately stab the knife into the body of the victim. However, in both films, this is not shown clearly, yet the sounds that we hear, for example screams from those who are actually being killed, suggest that they are actually being killed. Halloween shows blood, however only to a certain extent, not that it looks gruesome, however, the fact that we are aware that the female character is bleeding, we sympathise with her, especially as she was the character we were made to identify with from the beginning. '

INTEND ON FINISHING!!

Wanted To Do An Essay For You To Mark :)

Psycho – Essay

Psycho, directed by Alfred Hitchcock, who is famously known for his cameo’s on movies directed by himself, is a very important movie in terms of the slasher genre. Although Hitchcock is not a slasher genre director, as the genre did not exist in the 1960’s, he plays an important role in the slasher genre film history even up till today, where most of his work is influence upon other directors and therefore copied in order to give the audience pleasures which Hitchcock’s audience had achieved then.

Many influences such as different elements were originated from the film Psycho, although other films did contain these elements at the time. These are all key factors now-a-days to be considered in typical slasher genre films, that many repetoire of elements were first seen through Hitchcocks work. For example, iconography such as screaming is typical to re occur in a slasher genre film today. This adds emphasis on what is happening and the fact that the character is screaming is drummed into our ears and it almost seems as though we as the audience cannot escape from what is going on, when ironically, most people watch films for escapism. This is not hugely the case in Psycho, however, the actress is shown, excessively scared, when she is being stabbed continuously, trying to escape. However, the audience does not see the blade actually go into her body.

The image that we see of the blade, is a reoccuring image we see typically in a slasher genre film nowadays, however this was not the case in the 1960's as seeing an image of a knife was rae, because murder was something that people showed fear towards and turned a blind eye to.

Hitchcock decided to use a reoccurring image of a close up of an eye, with appears now and then throughout the film which reminds us of the fact that the hotel owner is enjoying voyeuristic pleasures by peeping through a hole in the wall behind the photo. This is seen to be wrong, and in a newer version of this film, we see that the fact that he is just looking through the hole in the wall, is been exaggerated into the hotel owner to show sexual desires whilst just looking. This is seen to be wrong, for a man to be spying on a women and enjoy the view, however the protagonist, doesn’t seem as though she is innocent towards sexual contact, as we see in the beginning opening scene, her sharing a bed with a man, who assuming she had sexual intercourse with, the night before.

Following this, the two characters then have a conversation about running away, and getting married. Therefore, when she steals the money from one of her clients, we as the audience are instantly made to believe that the story will be based on her taking the money. Hitchcock has a tendency of misleading the audience to thinking one thing; therefore we do not guess what will happen at the end.

However, after having talked to the hotel owner and by him she was implied at to be selfish for not thinking of her family, the protagonist admitted to wanting to go back, to redeem her sins. Yet she was still killed. This was a mystery to the audience, because when we knew she would be going back, we assumed that everything would be back to normal and the story will have been resolved. Instead she was murdered whilst in the shower scene by the Norman Bates’ “mother”, which we find out in the end, was a disguise of the son (hotel owner).

The fact that Hitchcock chose to use a knife to kill the character shows a slight sense of intimacy, as the murderer is forced to make physical contact with the person he is about to kill. An interpretation of this, is the person who actually continuously stabs a person, is releasing their sexual frustration out on a person who has actually had sex, and in the case of where I had read it, the director was talking about the “final girl”, who was seen to be someone who had fought off any kind of temptation for sexual intercourse with another person during the course of the film.

Similarly, this is the case in the film Creep, where the protagonist fights off temptation of having sex at the very beginning and at the end, we see that she is still living and therefore is the “final girl”. However, in this case, Hitchcock kills off the potential “final girl” within the first third of the film, however, the story line still lingers on about her. This shows that predominantly she was ideal for the “final girl”, however, at the end of the film, her sister fights off her sisters killer, and is therefore labelled as the “final girl” because she managed to get the murderer of her sister put in prison. Although, in the contemporary time, killing the killer was a theme that occurred within films, however, now we see that has changed, as all evil is killed off at the end and one or two good heroes remain.

This can then be linked with the character roles theory, where Prop says that every film includes different, yet same character roles. Usually, a Hero, Villain, Princess (not always in human form), and at the end the villain is found guilty, and faces consequences. This happens in Psycho, when the psycho himself (ironically the film is named after him, when he is meant to be the criminal), is arrested.

The story does not hold a tight resolution, as it still holds enigmas towards the end. The audience are still left confused as to what he went through, however this was resolved by the way in which the detective has a speech at the end and explains what the hotel owner had gone through previously with his mother. The fact that the film left with a disequilibrium, suggests that the situation was not bound to continue.

Hitchcock chose to use low key lighting in order to set suspense and black and white in order to primarily tp save money, but also so that the film isn’t too gory with the fact that there was a lot of blood shown in the shower scene. Long shots and close ups are used in order to vary uses of camera angles and also to allow audiences to identify with different characters. Hitchcock chose to use a lot of point of view shots, from the beginning of the film he used plenty in order to force the audiences to identify with the female protagonist. This was excellent technique, as in the 1960’s the type of equipment was not provided and nor was the editing software. After the female protagonist is killed, the audience start to identify with the Norman Bates, who killed her. This is because, we see things from his point of view, when he is clearing up the blood. We tend to sympathise with him, as we are still in confusion about his mother killing her.

The audience respond in many different ways towards this situation and are left in confusion towards the end. Audience tend to feel visceral pleasures as they are shocked at times, and tend to physically react towards what is going on. Sadistic pleasures, when the knife is being vigorously stabbed into her, but this is not all the audiences. Finally, we experience voyeurism as we are watching something we shouldn’t be watching.

Homework: Feedback on your blog buddies essay! My Blog Buddie is Prascilla...

Prascilla..ur essay is realy good! wel done!

you showed a lot of confidence when it came to talking about the male gaze, and other theries too! for example, the effects theory..however, you could have also included the uses and gretification theory. never mind dont think i included that either :)
the essay seemed slightly rushed, because maybe you spoke a lot about the revolution will not be televised and only a bit towards the end did you speak about your revolution. never mind it was still good.

thirdly, i really like the way u included historical context, whilst talking aobut civil rights, and you mentioned that the black people were oppressed by the white people. that is a very strong point should have elaborated :)

i like that fact where you mentioned the title being repeaTed constantly. not too sure if it makes the song seem more political..but it definatly stresses a point and constantly conveys the message of the song, reinforcing the fact that the revolution wil not be televised. with thisb you could have said something like "similar to this, Sarah Jones constantly is reinforcing the idea that women are not objects of the male gaze, and they cannot jus use ur for our pleasure, and this is shown by the way she also uses the technique of constantly repeating 'your revolution will not happen between these thighs' suggesting that a guys revolution is sexual pleasures".
anyway..i beta not go on!! but overal ur work is very good! wel dun! Sonal :)