Genre – Mockumentary
Sara and I chose the Mockumentary genre. What appeals to me most about this genre is the humor. Anyone or anything can be mocked and subjects are all around us. The characters are very human and thus are easy to sympathize with. The characters, setting, and themes of mockumentaries are numerous. There are the loveable losers, creepy sidekicks, and just plain quirky characters: All of whom either parallel someone we know or are someone with whom we can identify ourselves.

Having worked in a highly unappealing office setting for numerous years, my favorite mockumentaries are the BBC’s The Office and the movie Office Space. Both have done an excellent job of pointing out the annoying details of cubicle life. Unfortunately for those still working in the office setting, both also are startlingly accurate in their depiction of office life.

I chose to interview Andy about his viewing of sports chat sites. There are three sites that he visits: two deal Minnesota based teams only and one deals with all professional sports. He estimated that he spent roughly five hours per week viewing the sites. Initially, Andy appeared somewhat embarrassed by the fact that he views chat sites, but as our questioning progressed he seemed to become assured that there was nothing to be ashamed about. Although he sometimes visits the sites at work, he typically views them at home and in the evening. There are seemingly few rules to posting, as long as there seems to be some valid point and the post is about sports or athletes. Andy likes these sites because they contain information that is not readily available through major media sources. There is more of what Andy called “gossip” about players getting traded, players getting into trouble, and even player sightings around the Twin Cities. Andy pointed out that since there are essentially no requirements to document rumors, you may hear about player transactions weeks in advance. Andy said he does not view these sites in order to have things to talk about, but certain topics do lend themselves to outside conversations. He gave the example of Eddie Griffin’s recent run-ins with the law. While he would not choose to view chat rooms with another person as entertainment, he would show the sites to someone if he thought they would find a certain topic interesting. I then asked Andy why he found this method of gaining information intriguing. Andy replied that chat sites were convenient – he can view them whenever and wherever he chooses, as long as he has an internet connection. In particular, he likes watching YouTube and other clips of players that he otherwise would not get to see play until the season starts, players he doesn’t know much about. Andy’s reading strategy consists of searching the sites for interesting discussion topics such as potential signings or trades. There are certain people whose comments he prefers over others and he stated that over time he has formulated opinions of the different posters (some of whom have more intelligent insights than others). Andy does not normally post comments and has rarely done so. He only posts if he feels he has a new perspective or something extremely beneficial to add. He said he would really have to have a strong opinion about a topic in order to post a comment.
A recurring theme throughout this interview was that Andy liked the wide variety of information available – unlike a typical newspaper or sporting magazine. Andy felt as though he was getting insight that he would not have been privy to without these chat sites. He also repeatedly mentioned the ease of finding the information he wanted and ignoring the information he did not care about. I can see why Andy finds these sites intriguing. If it were a topic that I was interested in, I too would visit chat sites for their convenience and the “knowledge” that cannot be found in other forms such as newspapers or news programs. In terms of sport chat sites, I have no desire to know about possible trades, etc, prior to them happening. Thus, I have trouble identifying with the chatters and glean little meaning from the site. Conversely, Andy easily identifies with the sports fanatics who chat and enjoys visiting the sites.

Media Analysis - Men as unintelligent continued
Example #2 - Dominos Home Improvement Commercial
In the spot, a woman in a home improvement store rings one of the many doorbell displays which causes men throughout the store to come running like salivating dogs believing it's the Domino's delivery guy at the door. This puts men on the same level as a domesticated pet. Advertising represents man’s priorities as one of the following: food, sex, beer, or sports. Dominos chooses to highlight food in this ad. I don't think I need to say more.

Analysis of Media Representation - Men as unintelligent

Example #1, Miller Lite's Square Table

In these Miller Liter commercials, several men sit around a square table discussing what should be made into “man law.” The men represented are men’s men – Burt Reynolds, a cowboy, a professional football player, etc. What they are discussing are trivial things such as whether or not to clink bottles at the top of the bottle or at the bottom of the bottle. This example highlights the insignificant points that are strenuously pondered over at the square table. This portrays men as unintelligent beings concerned with shallow points – as though they have nothing else on which to exert their mental energy. In addition, this particular example also portrays men as homophobic, since their final decision to tap bottoms was a result of realizing that tapping tops was too close to kissing another man. One man, shown as straining to comprehend, sees and up-close shot of two bottle tops touching and declares that “our saliva is touching.” Burt then says, “that’s technically kissing. Why don’t we touch bottoms?” The cowboy now has a problem with that and says, “Hey Hollywood, I’m not into touching bottoms,” with a look of disgust on his face. Burt, obviously the brains here, has to clarify that he means the bottle bottoms.

Critical Analysis of Magazine commercial

The ad is a full page (front and back) in Sports Illustrated. It is for Abilify, a prescription medicine to treat bipolar disorder. The text heading states “Treating Bipolar Disorder Takes Understanding: (there are then three subtopics), 1. You’ve been up and down with mood swings. You want to move forward. Maybe ABILIFY can help: (there are then subtopics from this, stating what abilify can do), 2. How ABILIFY is thought to work: (there is then a very rudimentary picture of the brain with an arrow showing down for chemical and up for activity and a curved line connecting them. They then describe how abilify adjusts dopamine activity, etc.), 3. Ask your healthcare professional if one-a-day ABILIFY is right for you.

There is a large symbol of Abilify (aripiprazole) with an A and a road leading off to the distance. The caption below reads, “For The Road Ahead.” Off to the side of the ad a woman stands with her back to the camera. She is looking out over a small dirt road (background to the subtopics in the foreground) that extends through a lush green open field. She dressed in a skirt and red sweater and the wind is blowing her hair and skirt. Her hair is pulled back into a type of bun, but it is still evident that the wind is blowing through it.

The bottom forth of the page is taken up with small print information about the drug, as is the entire back page.

Feminist Analysis
Instantly I was surprised to see this ad in a men’s magazine. I felt it was not directed towards men suffering from bipolar, but at men suffering because their significant other is suffering from bipolar disorder. The first reason I thought this was because the picture of the seemingly bipolar person is a woman, not a man. Secondly, the points of what abilify can do seem to be directed towards men by emphasizing qualities men want in women – “stabilize your mood” and “Most patients taking ABILIFY did not gain weight or feel drowsy.” It could have read, “stabilize your woman’s mood.” I think men would see an ad depicting a woman with mood swings and think about their wife or girlfriend’s mood swings, not their own. I feel this ad justifies the stereotypes about women’s weight by highlighting that most don’t gain weight on this drug. The woman in the ad is neatly dressed and thin.

I also think this ad points to the age-old belief that women are mentally unstable in comparison with men. Why would they show a man suffering from bipolar when it is women who are so unstable? But why does this ad appear in a magazine dominantly read by males, if not as a guiding point for diagnosing your significant other? The large title, “Treating Bipolar Disorder Takes Understanding” points to men understanding that women are unstable and they are here to give a drug to help. It showcases the gender difference that men are the helpers and women need help.

Postmodern Analysis
Most arguments in this analysis could also be added to the above analysis. I think this ad is pointing to the quick fix of a pill to make people’s lives happier. In reality, bipolar treatment is not as easy as a nice walk down a road through a lush green field with the wind slightly blowing, as the abilify ad suggests. The ad acts as though calmness is only a pill-a-day away. Again, thinking that his is directed towards men whose significant other is suffering from bipolar, understanding the disease consists of treating it with a pill. Solutions to happiness are simple and taken with water. It does not address the messiness and difficulty associated with real mental illness. The side affects are listed in tiny print while it is highlighted that weight gain is not common. Weight gain seems trivial in the scope of a mental disease that is potentially life-threatening. However, in an ad that skews reality, weight is an important factor.