http://youtube.com/watch?v=vFL0w1ruiCM
Goodness Gracious Me: Typical Asian Parents.
This short 2 min clip is a stereotypical representation of what Asian parents are like. Noting that stereotypes are based on some truth, many would argue that this clip offers a true representation of the expectations parents have from their children.
As the clip opens, it becomes instantly recognisable that the parents have a ‘freshi’ accent, -or more commonly known as a heavy Indian accent on the English language. ‘Goodness Gracious Me’ stereotypes the parent’s speech to create authenticity; whilst this is promoting a generalisation in speech, there is of course a truth behind this – the immigration of Indians into Britain created this type of speech that is common in older Asians.
As the clip progresses, the results in the post signify the importance of education to these parents. There is a clear divide in the expectations from the mother and the father; the mother is happy to see her son’s results, whereas the father notices the single B amongst the four A’s, not appreciating the quality of the grades. This mother/father reaction is the generalised distinction in what occurs in Indian households and ‘Goodness Gracious Me’ plays on the binary opposition well to drive the narrative forward.
The father then compares his son’s grades to that of his friends. This is another comparison that is often found in the father’s reaction; he is never happy with the grades and the constant comparison with other children determines the son as a failure. There is social emphasis placed on what other parents in the community will think.
In terms of education, the clip conforms to almost every Indian parents expectations; that is to have their son become a doctor and this is certainly what the son aims for too. The profound influence of parents upon their children is unnoticeable, and what is further interesting is that during this entire conversation there is the absence of the son. –A symbolic entity highlighting the pressure of parents to the extent where their son is denied a voice.
Friday 14 December 2007
Wednesday 14 November 2007
Pluralism/ Marxism Consequences.
Marxism is society are told what to do according to class therefore people face inequality and there are types of media which are suited for that class.
However this is wrong so pluralist give choices to their audiences.
I agree with the person above, i do believe that there is a social class division, which splits the society up. The rich will stay rich and the rich will stay poor.
There is only a social class division if you think there is. And if you do then there are ways to stop that. Individuals split themselves up into social 'classes'.
Yeah, individuals are to express there opinions through ther media without restrictions. Such as google setting up blogger.com, as the audience get more literate they become more demanding and selective.But like you said, google owning blogger.com is an example of big companies owning small companies. Rupert Murdoch for instance owns many companies, and although he provides variety, he chooses what goes on and what doesn't in his companies and therefore his underlying message(if he was one) can still be approved throughout.
Firstly on blogger.com you can set up a blogger.com you can set set up a blog on anything so no ideologies ae fittered to us. Yes Murdoch will channel his opinions to us but in todays society there are so many sources to gain info from.
What's missing from this debate is the extent of ifluence from a Marxist viewpoint and a Pluralistic view too. This debate focuses heavily on factors for and against each view without explaining the 'how' successfully though towrads the end the media ownership of Murdoch does come to light. To make this more stronger, their also needs to be confident use of media terminologu suh as 'media conglomerates' and audience theories.
Marxism is society are told what to do according to class therefore people face inequality and there are types of media which are suited for that class.
However this is wrong so pluralist give choices to their audiences.
I agree with the person above, i do believe that there is a social class division, which splits the society up. The rich will stay rich and the rich will stay poor.
There is only a social class division if you think there is. And if you do then there are ways to stop that. Individuals split themselves up into social 'classes'.
Yeah, individuals are to express there opinions through ther media without restrictions. Such as google setting up blogger.com, as the audience get more literate they become more demanding and selective.But like you said, google owning blogger.com is an example of big companies owning small companies. Rupert Murdoch for instance owns many companies, and although he provides variety, he chooses what goes on and what doesn't in his companies and therefore his underlying message(if he was one) can still be approved throughout.
Firstly on blogger.com you can set up a blogger.com you can set set up a blog on anything so no ideologies ae fittered to us. Yes Murdoch will channel his opinions to us but in todays society there are so many sources to gain info from.
What's missing from this debate is the extent of ifluence from a Marxist viewpoint and a Pluralistic view too. This debate focuses heavily on factors for and against each view without explaining the 'how' successfully though towrads the end the media ownership of Murdoch does come to light. To make this more stronger, their also needs to be confident use of media terminologu suh as 'media conglomerates' and audience theories.
Rupert Murdoch.
Rupert Murdoch is a well known media figure who owns several media institutions. Some of these include newspapers such as The Sun, The Daily Mail, and and tv stations such as Fox TV and Sky. Recently, Murdoch has brought the American Wall Street Journal (newspaper.) He is currently second in the Media 100 List. He studied economics as Oxford University.
Murdoch has in recent years extended his empire by branching out into eastern media instutitions. -He has brought Star TV from Hong Kong and Turkish TV channel, TGRT.
Rupert Murdoch is a well known media figure who owns several media institutions. Some of these include newspapers such as The Sun, The Daily Mail, and and tv stations such as Fox TV and Sky. Recently, Murdoch has brought the American Wall Street Journal (newspaper.) He is currently second in the Media 100 List. He studied economics as Oxford University.
Murdoch has in recent years extended his empire by branching out into eastern media instutitions. -He has brought Star TV from Hong Kong and Turkish TV channel, TGRT.
Double trouble for Virgin and Sky ads.
The ADA had a go at both Sky and Virgin Media for their misleading interpretations of their adverts.
Virgin's problem was with its "superfast" broadband internet that claimed to be 4 times faster than that of its competitors. The ADA recieved several complaints about the validity of the "superfast" internet connection to which Virgin replied by stating that their ad's noramlly phrase that as "up to" but some ad's overlooked this factor. The "4 times faster£ comparison was also tampered with seeing as one of their competitors had an extremely low internet connection speed that brought the whole average down.
Sky = "Sky Anytime" and not making it clear that this offer was only open to customers already with Sky.
I chose this article because it highlights the power of words and phrasing in advertising. A simple mistake like the implication of phrases, implicity rather than explicitly can cause much mayhem. It is good to see that in all cases, the ADA found in favour of the complaints.
The ADA had a go at both Sky and Virgin Media for their misleading interpretations of their adverts.
Virgin's problem was with its "superfast" broadband internet that claimed to be 4 times faster than that of its competitors. The ADA recieved several complaints about the validity of the "superfast" internet connection to which Virgin replied by stating that their ad's noramlly phrase that as "up to" but some ad's overlooked this factor. The "4 times faster£ comparison was also tampered with seeing as one of their competitors had an extremely low internet connection speed that brought the whole average down.
Sky = "Sky Anytime" and not making it clear that this offer was only open to customers already with Sky.
I chose this article because it highlights the power of words and phrasing in advertising. A simple mistake like the implication of phrases, implicity rather than explicitly can cause much mayhem. It is good to see that in all cases, the ADA found in favour of the complaints.
Monday 5 November 2007
Google spreads its wings!
Google HQ in Calafornia
Google has confirmed plans to launch "Android", an internet medium available on mobile phones. At present, specialised engineering is required to get Google software on to handsets but with the support of all the major mobile phone companies, Google will be able to successfully see this operation through by next year.
This ofcourse is good news for advertisers, bringing potential customers and advertisers closer whilst allowing the individual to surf the internet whenever possible.
This is an important development in the new media because it highlights the power of Google but also gives a preview into how media is shaping your future for us.
Pluralism.
I agree with pluralism because in the twenty first century where new media technology is on a global expansion, the validity of a theory which suggests we are limited in media choice is actually quite an insult to media development. The growth of the internet along with globalisation means that as consumers we are no longer subjected to Marxist ideas of a mass culture but rather the individual ability of texts which enables us to be selective in out choice of consumption. -We are no longer the passive audience of 1950 where our media choice on television is restricted on channels 1-4 but the audience of an ever-growing, media literate society where our roles in choosing the media we want to consume has made our roles impressively active. We aren’t faced with cultural hygenomisation and a mass culture but the readers of a society which accepts and uses the variety of media material available to us with the choice enabling us as educated individuals to select our choices from an enormous database.
I agree with pluralism because in the twenty first century where new media technology is on a global expansion, the validity of a theory which suggests we are limited in media choice is actually quite an insult to media development. The growth of the internet along with globalisation means that as consumers we are no longer subjected to Marxist ideas of a mass culture but rather the individual ability of texts which enables us to be selective in out choice of consumption. -We are no longer the passive audience of 1950 where our media choice on television is restricted on channels 1-4 but the audience of an ever-growing, media literate society where our roles in choosing the media we want to consume has made our roles impressively active. We aren’t faced with cultural hygenomisation and a mass culture but the readers of a society which accepts and uses the variety of media material available to us with the choice enabling us as educated individuals to select our choices from an enormous database.
Wednesday 31 October 2007
“Is the dominance of a few global media organisations a good thing or dangerous?”
a. How is it possible to have the domination of a few global media organisations? Does the word ‘domination’ not suggest that these organisations entirely rule the media scene? How is this possible if there are only a few of them?
b. Well, take for example big organisations such as newspapers. The newspapers are dominated by The Sun and The Mirror.
a. I see. But I don’t see how this can be dangerous.
b. Well, if these global organisations are in the hands of one person then that gives him/ her unlimited power to choose what he/she wants in these organisations. This allows him/her to sometimes manipulate the media and present bias views.
a. Like Rupert Murdoch. I understand. So in some ways this is a bit like ‘cultural imperialism.’ This is currently the case with the US. Today, many critics argue that the current US media domination amounts to cultural imperialism whereby their culture is forced on us through our own media consumption.
b. Yes, and that can be dangerous for smaller organisation because it undermines their position in the media. Similarly, this is threatening to national media organisations and especially for smaller independent organisations.
a. That reminds me of a term called “McDonaldisation.” This refers to the growth and profound influence of the largest media organisations who are supplying us constantly with lots and lots of this media that is sometimes politically incorrect.
b. And this can be even more dangerous through ‘cultural homogenisation’ because it means that our cultural perceptions, -which are naturally and unconsciously formed through the media, are constructed through the ideologies and values from the media texts we consume.
a. However, is there really a true domination of these organisations? I mean, we still have these smaller media organisations. The thing with the dominance of these larger organisations instantly suggests that its audience are passive, when this cannot be said for all its readers. I believe in the end it comes down to the actual interpreter. If he/ she plays a passive role to the texts it consumes then surely this domination can be a dangerous thing. But, if you have an active audience that draws its opinions from a range of media texts then this is not necessarily a bad thing.
a. How is it possible to have the domination of a few global media organisations? Does the word ‘domination’ not suggest that these organisations entirely rule the media scene? How is this possible if there are only a few of them?
b. Well, take for example big organisations such as newspapers. The newspapers are dominated by The Sun and The Mirror.
a. I see. But I don’t see how this can be dangerous.
b. Well, if these global organisations are in the hands of one person then that gives him/ her unlimited power to choose what he/she wants in these organisations. This allows him/her to sometimes manipulate the media and present bias views.
a. Like Rupert Murdoch. I understand. So in some ways this is a bit like ‘cultural imperialism.’ This is currently the case with the US. Today, many critics argue that the current US media domination amounts to cultural imperialism whereby their culture is forced on us through our own media consumption.
b. Yes, and that can be dangerous for smaller organisation because it undermines their position in the media. Similarly, this is threatening to national media organisations and especially for smaller independent organisations.
a. That reminds me of a term called “McDonaldisation.” This refers to the growth and profound influence of the largest media organisations who are supplying us constantly with lots and lots of this media that is sometimes politically incorrect.
b. And this can be even more dangerous through ‘cultural homogenisation’ because it means that our cultural perceptions, -which are naturally and unconsciously formed through the media, are constructed through the ideologies and values from the media texts we consume.
a. However, is there really a true domination of these organisations? I mean, we still have these smaller media organisations. The thing with the dominance of these larger organisations instantly suggests that its audience are passive, when this cannot be said for all its readers. I believe in the end it comes down to the actual interpreter. If he/ she plays a passive role to the texts it consumes then surely this domination can be a dangerous thing. But, if you have an active audience that draws its opinions from a range of media texts then this is not necessarily a bad thing.
How ITV won back Sir Trevor McDonaldIVT won back Sir Trevor after his contract with the ITV finished. As a key figure in introducing 'back to basics' style policies of newsreading, he has been a key figure of ITV news but h has agreed only to work for a limited time until News at 10 comes through.
"Despite the expense of luring Sir Trevor back, ITV chiefs consider it worthwhile if it helps the network's negotiations with Ofcom to get rid of contract rights renewal, the advertising airtime trading mechanism that has been blamed for exacerbating the broadcaster's revenue decline."
The cutbacks in BBC staff
"So let's look at the world as it really is. The cuts in jobs are not a brave step into the 21st century of the "multi-platformed digital age" and not a worked-out business plan for a slimmer, fitter BBC. They are not designed to improve quality or to innovate. They are simply a way of saving £2bn - so please don't try presenting them as a rational strategy"
g
The Guardian article argues that cutbacks of the BBC staff was not a carefully considered action and rejects the idea of it saving 2 billion. This extra money, the BBC claim will be used to create documentaries and programmes of a much higher standard that ever before, -but whether this is justified or not still remains a debateable issue.
Monday 15 October 2007
Why the Sun might dump Brown
The Sun has revealed, through spokesman Irwin Stelzer, one of Rupert Murdoch's top advisers that they may be dropping their support for Brown and New Labour for Cameron after almost a decade of support for Blair.
The pivotal issue of joining the EU, without holding a referendum has annoyed Murdoch who has strong views on this matter. There is also general public despair held over Browns decision to cancel the speculated snap poll which Murdoch isn't too happy about either.
Considering both conferances -Labour and Conservative, Stelzer reveals that Cameron may just deserve another look.
This article is important because it successfully highlights one of many things. The first is that it illuminates the very power Murdoch holds, -is there a link between Browns decision to call off the election and Murdoch's decision to print an EU article against his election mandate? Secondly, this just goes to show how politics affects the media, -both on a interior and exterior level.
The Sun has revealed, through spokesman Irwin Stelzer, one of Rupert Murdoch's top advisers that they may be dropping their support for Brown and New Labour for Cameron after almost a decade of support for Blair.
The pivotal issue of joining the EU, without holding a referendum has annoyed Murdoch who has strong views on this matter. There is also general public despair held over Browns decision to cancel the speculated snap poll which Murdoch isn't too happy about either.
Considering both conferances -Labour and Conservative, Stelzer reveals that Cameron may just deserve another look.
This article is important because it successfully highlights one of many things. The first is that it illuminates the very power Murdoch holds, -is there a link between Browns decision to call off the election and Murdoch's decision to print an EU article against his election mandate? Secondly, this just goes to show how politics affects the media, -both on a interior and exterior level.
Tuesday 9 October 2007
Viacom: History
In March 2005, Viacom (now known as CBS) made plans to divide the company into two different companies. There were two reasons for this:
1) The company was dealing with a decline in their share price
2) Rivalry between Leslie Moonves and Tom Freston, (longtime heads of NOW CBS and MTV Networks) was creating conflict at work.
This is what happened to the company:
After the departure of Mel Karmazin in 2004, Redstone, who served as chairman, decided to split the offices between Moonves and Freston.
Moonves - The original Viacom changed its name to CBS Corporation. It now includes Viacom's "slow growth businesses", namely The CW , CBS Radio, Simon & Schuster, CBS Outdoor, Showtime, CBS Records, CBS Paramount Television and most television production assets.
Freston - A new company, the present Viacom, was created. It is comprised of MTV Networks, BET Networks, Paramount's movie studio, and Paramount Pictures' home entertainment operations. These businesses are categorised as the "high-growth businesses" (MTV Networks and BET Networks in particular). By splitting into different companies, Viacom is able to infuse capital from these "high growth" business allowing future expansion.
Sumner Redstone still controls 71% of the voting stock of both companies and is the chairman of both companies.
2005:
*Neopets - virtual pet website
*Paramount and Dreamworks
2006:
*Atom entertainment
*Global Broadcast news to form Viacom 18(JV) -India
In March 2005, Viacom (now known as CBS) made plans to divide the company into two different companies. There were two reasons for this:
1) The company was dealing with a decline in their share price
2) Rivalry between Leslie Moonves and Tom Freston, (longtime heads of NOW CBS and MTV Networks) was creating conflict at work.
This is what happened to the company:
After the departure of Mel Karmazin in 2004, Redstone, who served as chairman, decided to split the offices between Moonves and Freston.
Moonves - The original Viacom changed its name to CBS Corporation. It now includes Viacom's "slow growth businesses", namely The CW , CBS Radio, Simon & Schuster, CBS Outdoor, Showtime, CBS Records, CBS Paramount Television and most television production assets.
Freston - A new company, the present Viacom, was created. It is comprised of MTV Networks, BET Networks, Paramount's movie studio, and Paramount Pictures' home entertainment operations. These businesses are categorised as the "high-growth businesses" (MTV Networks and BET Networks in particular). By splitting into different companies, Viacom is able to infuse capital from these "high growth" business allowing future expansion.
Sumner Redstone still controls 71% of the voting stock of both companies and is the chairman of both companies.
2005:
*Neopets - virtual pet website
*Paramount and Dreamworks
2006:
*Atom entertainment
*Global Broadcast news to form Viacom 18(JV) -India
Friday 28 September 2007
http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,,2179441,00.html
"BBC chairman Sir Michael Lyons has told corporation staff the BBC must make 3% annual savings and will focus on quality of programmes, rather than quantity. "
The chairman of the BBC has decided that with its annual savings, he wants the BBC to focus on making programmes of quality becuase he feels that since everyone pays the licence fee, programmes must give them something in return.No programmes will be cancelled during this period- up until 2012 but the future from there is then unknown. The dilema here is trying to please loyal customers whilst trying to reach under served audiences.
Plans to save this 3% is by:
"making fullest use of the BBC's output, focusing on producing quality and using it effectively across as many services as possible" and "reducing the volume of output but sustaining the range and diversity."
I chose this story because new developments to the BBC, an institution which stands synonomous with British tv is clearly of importance. Since we all pay the licence fee it is necessary to know what will be done with the public's money. This makes this article important.
I support this new change becuase it means programmes brought to us will be ones which will show the use of our money in progress. Finally, there is a chance of watching tv that is interesting and has more than face value.
"BBC chairman Sir Michael Lyons has told corporation staff the BBC must make 3% annual savings and will focus on quality of programmes, rather than quantity. "
The chairman of the BBC has decided that with its annual savings, he wants the BBC to focus on making programmes of quality becuase he feels that since everyone pays the licence fee, programmes must give them something in return.No programmes will be cancelled during this period- up until 2012 but the future from there is then unknown. The dilema here is trying to please loyal customers whilst trying to reach under served audiences.
Plans to save this 3% is by:
"making fullest use of the BBC's output, focusing on producing quality and using it effectively across as many services as possible" and "reducing the volume of output but sustaining the range and diversity."
I chose this story because new developments to the BBC, an institution which stands synonomous with British tv is clearly of importance. Since we all pay the licence fee it is necessary to know what will be done with the public's money. This makes this article important.
I support this new change becuase it means programmes brought to us will be ones which will show the use of our money in progress. Finally, there is a chance of watching tv that is interesting and has more than face value.
Monday 24 September 2007
Who owns Disney?
Disney’s founder was Walter Elias Disney. He had the dream of producing something of a very creative and innovative nature. This continues to lie as the underlying message of the company’s success.His brother Roy also had an equal share in the business and at the formal beginning of “The Walt Disney Company” he suggested the name to be changed from “Disney Brothers Cartoon Studio” to “Walt Disney Studio.”
Walt Disney died on Dec 15th, 1966 and Roy (who was a year older than him) took over the company. Roy Disney died two months later.
The company was then led by a team including Card Walker, Donn Tatum and Roy Miller. They were the originals all trained by the Disney brothers.
On October 1, 2005, Robert Iger took to the position of chief executive officer becoming only the 7th individual to lead the company in its entire history. He was born in 1951, has 3 children and is married to television journalist and author, Willow Bay.
Previously, Mr Iger served as the President and Chief Operating Officer of the company since 2000. In this role he oversaw all aspects of the company’s international relations including its filmed entertainment, theme parks and consumer business products. -He possessed all the necessary work experience to fulfil his job requirements as CEO. He was also a member of Disney’s board of directors at that time.
His career outside Disney began at ABC in 1974. For 32 years he held responsible senior management positions including President and Chief Operating Officer. He, very importantly, guided the business relationship between ABC and The Walt Disney Company. This allowed him to gain further insight into Disney.
ABC saw tremendous growth during Iger’s career and this was to certainly reflect at his career at Disney too. (More on his work on the “History” section)
Disney and its relationship with other companies:
In 1983, Disney initiates the “Disney Channel” in an effort to extend its business. In doing so they established a new film label, “Touchstone Pictures” with the release of “Splash” in 1984.
With regards to “Touchstone,” Disney then introduced “Touchstone Television” which produced TV shows.
Disney also made use of “Hollywood Records” who supplied the soundtracks to their movies. They produced a wide range of soundtracks raging from rap to contemporary, more upbeat music.
Moving into publishing, Disney then formed “Hyperion Books,” “Hyperion Books for Children” and “Disney Press” which released Disney and non- Disney subjects. All was in effort to respond to the advancing media technology of the age.
In 1995, they joined partnership with “Pixar Animation” to release “Toy Story.”
In 1996, Disney participated in a $19 billion transaction to take over Capital Cities/ ABC. This brought television network to Disney. In addition to 10 TV stations, 21 radio stations, 7 daily newspapers and ownership positions of:
A&E,
Lifetime,
History Channel,
(Powerhouse sports network) ESPN.
In 1998, the company entered the cruise line business with the launch of the “Disney Magic” which was joined by the “Disney Wonder” one year later. Both ships tour the Caribbean, stopping at Disney’s own island paradise Castaway Cay.
The History:
Walt arrived in Disney in the summer of 1923 with dreams and determination but with no finance to fund his dreams. He made a “pilot film” of a little girl in a cartoon world called “Alice’s Wonderland.” On October 16, 1923 a New York distributor, “M.J Winkler” agreed to release these Alice Comedies and this date became the formal beginning of The Walt Disney Company.
The Alice Comedies lasted four years. Walt continuously tried to stretch the boundaries of visual bounds by adopting innovative effects to his works. In 1927, he decided to move to an ALL CARTOON series and created the star “Oswald the Lucky Rabbit.” He made 26 Oswald cartoons in a year and when he tried to get more funding from his distributor he found that the distributor had gone behind his back and signed all of Walts animators in an attempt to make the Oswald cartoons in his own studio but for much less money without Walt. From then, Walt decided to own everything that he made.
Walt now had to come up with a new star. With his chief animator, Ub Iwerks, Walt designed a mouse… Mickey Mouse. Ub animated 2 Mickey Mouse cartoons whilst Walt decided that his studio should make a film (the first sound cartoon) and so the third Mickey Mouse cartoon was released with fully synchronised sound. Mickey was an immediate success.Walt Disney then produced another series- the Silly Symphonies. Each of the films in this series featured different characters. The aim was to allow his animators to experiment with stories that relied less on humour, placing a large emphasis on mood, emotion and musical themes. Silly Symphonies won the Academy Award for Best Cartoon of 1932.
In terms of Disney’s historical, political and social relevance, the introduction of Three Little Pigs in 1933 was not only a break-through in character animation but it provided something of an anthem for fighting “The Great Depression.” (-Who’s afraid of the big bad wolf)
Disney’s merchandise began from a very ordinary situation. As Walt recalls, “A fellow kept hanging around my hotel waving $5300 at me and saying that he wanted to put the mouse on paper tablets fro school children…” In need of money, he accepted this and this led to Disney’s consumer products business.
In 1934, Walt had the idea of producing an animated feature film of the Snow White and Seven Dwarfs. People thought that a cartoon couldn’t hold the audience’s attention beyond the usual 8 minute running time but after 3 years of making the film, it was a spectacular hit.
With WW2 at hand, the company lost access to its foreign markets. It’s next 2 films, Pinocchio and Fantasia; released 1940 were unable to recoup their financial costs. This put the company at financial risk. In 1941, Dumbo was made on a very limited budget but turned out to be profitable. Bambi then followed in 1942.
During the war, Walt Disney made 2 films about South America; Saludos Amigos and The Three Caballeros at the request of the State Dept. They also produced propaganda and training films for the military.
1950 saw 3 landmark achievements;
* The studio’s first completely live action film - Treasure Island
* The return to classic animated features - Cinderella
* The first Disney television show at Christmas time.
Disney saw the potential of TV and in 1954 launched the Disneyland anthology series, featuring the first TV mini series, Davy Crockett. This ran for 29 years making it the longest running prime time television series in history. The Mickey Mouse club began in 1955.
Amusement parks were next on the agenda. Walt wanted to create a place that could entertain the whole family and in 1955 the first park opened. It was a whole new experience, being with the stars of the shows and successfully attracted visitors.
In the 1960’s, more classical films like 101 Dalmatians were created using Audio - Animatronics. (Whets this?) In 1964 came Mary Poppins which labelled Disney’s achievements as a filmmaker combing live action, animation and animatronics to tell a classic story for the entire family.
In 1969, Disney established itself an educational purpose by producing educational films.
The EPCOT (experimental prototype community of tomorrow) was Walt’s dream of a 400 acre Disneyland park consisting of a theme park, hotels, campgrounds… linked by a monorail. After Walt’s death, this dream was carried out by his team who saw this as a combination of the ‘future world’ and ‘world showcase.’
Disneyland parks then moved to an international level; to Tokyo and Japan.
Films from the Disney library were selected for the TV syndication market; classic animated films were released on video cassette setting a whole new kind of success as they reached a new generation of children who could watch films at their own conveyance at home.
Between 1986 and 2003, Disney saw the business advancing in all of its areas; this can be seen in its increasing numbers of theme parks and film productions.
In 2003, Pirates of the Caribbean, Finding Nemo all smashed audience expectations.
Media material produced by Disney:
* Cartoons:
-Alice’s Wonderland
-Oswald the lucky rabbit
-Mickey Mouse
*Films:
-Silly Symphonies
-The 3 Little Pigs
- Snow White and the 7 Dwarfs
-Pinocchio
-Fantasia
-Dumbo
-Bambi
-Lady and the Tramp
-Sleeping Beauty
Propaganda:
-Saludos Amigos
-The 3 Caballeros
“Package” feature films:
-Make Mine Music
-Melody Time
*Live Action Programmes:
-Treasure Island
-Song of the South
-So Dear to my Heart
*TV Programmes:
-The Disneyland Anthology series
-The Mickey Mouse Club
-Zorro
Responding to the age of the “new media:”
Iger introduced for Disney to become the first broadcaster to have its TV shows made available on ipod’s. This was done in order to connect with its consumers in new ways.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)