Cultivation Analysis and the Local News

As stated in the Narrative Paradigm, humans are storytelling beings. Cultivation Analysis posits that television has become the source for the majority of stories in modern culture. Based on this constant influence of television, our world views are shaped by what we see on television. An important aspect of this theory is the idea of light versus heavy television viewers. Heavy viewers, those who watch four or more hours of television a day, are more likely to mainstream, or perceive reality as similar to what is pictured in the media despite the fact that it differs from actual reality. Heavy viewers are also more likely to agree with the statements of the Mean World Index-that most people are looking out for themselves, you can't be too careful in dealing with people, and most people will take advantage of you given the chance. In examining local news broadcasts, it becomes clear why heavy viewers would see the world as a mean place.

The local news is dominated by stories of arson, robbery, and violent crime. As these video clips show, stabbings are always a hot ticket for local news programs. Based on these facts about the medium, heavy television viewers are likely to be strongly affected by the local news. For example, despite the fact that many television viewers live in safe, suburban neighborhoods, they may mainstream their view of their society and view the world as a dangerous place. In other words, despite the fact that these local stories may have no resonance with many viewers, in that their lived realities do no coincide with the reality portrayed on the news, the viewers will still face the world with increased fear.

Additionally, viewers of local news will most likely experience both first and second order effects. Using the video clips as examples, it's easy to examine how such effects would manifest themselves. These clips state factually the events of two violent crimes, specifically stabbings. Viewers learning the facts of the crimes are experiencing first order effects. However, should those viewers take those facts and hypothesize that stabbings are a common occurrence in the area, they are experiencing second order effects. They are making assumptions based on the facts they've learned from the news.

The local news coverage also relates to the three Bs of television. Firstly, it blurs traditional distinctions between people. For example, an unemployed, uneducated man and a successful, well-educated woman would often have differing views of the world. However, if they both frequently watch the news coverage of their area, they could very easily begin to see the world in a similar way. Secondly, television blends people's realities to form to the cultural mainstream. In other words, based on our exposure to television, we agree on what is real. So despite the fact that people in their personal lives have very different realities, television blends everything together into one mainstream reality. Finally, television bends that reality to the interests of television sponsors. In other words, if the local news constantly focuses on stories of violent crime, the home security company that sponsors the broadcasts will benefit.

Clearly when we watch the local news we are doing far more than simply observing the events in our community. We are part of a storytelling experience which subtly but surely influences our perceptions of reality.

Cultivation Analysis: A Portrayal of African Americans on Television

Above you will find three pieces of television media: one music video, a clip from a television show, and a clip from a news station. In the following blog entry, I will explain how each of the videos pertains to George Gerbner’s Cultivation Analysis.

To begin with, a brief explanation of Cultivation Analysis must be given and elaborated upon. Cultivation analysis essentially believes that if people are exposed to media messages over a long period of time, people’s perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and understandings will be shaped and changed in congruence with the media messages.

There is a Four-Step Process that researchers developed and used to help explain how cultivation works. The four steps of the process are message system analysis (analysis of content), formulation of questions about viewers’ social realities (make questions about how people understand their everyday lives), surveying the audience (asking about how much media intake audiences receive AND asking the questions from step two), comparing the social realities of light and heavy viewers (this involves cultivation differential which is the difference between the responses of light and heavy viewers). Although the Four-Step Process is an important aspect of Cultivation Analysis, it will not be used in this particular blog because it is only used by Cultivation researchers.

There are also three products of Cultivation Analysis. The first is mainstreaming, which is the phenomenon that people who watch a lot of television end up viewing the world in terms of how the media messages portrayed the world. The second is resonance, which occurs when the reality portrayed by media messages is reality in the real world. Both mainstreaming and resonance produce effects on two levels: first order effects and second order effects. First Order Effects pertains to learning facts from the media. Second Order Effects pertains to learning values/assumptions from the media. The third and final product of Cultivation Analysis is the Mean World Index, which is an index that is based on three statements: most people are just looking out for themselves, you can’t be too careful in dealing with people, and most people would take advantage of you if they got the chance.

Cultivation Analysis also contains what Gerbner terms as the 3 Bs of Television. These are blurring (traditional distinctions are blurred), blending (“reality” is blended into a cultural mainstream), and bending (the mainstream reality benefits the elite).

Because it is very difficult to find pieces of media that depict the affect of particular media messages on people over a long period of time, I will draw from personal experiences, and experiences of my friends, in incorporating the video clips into the Cultivation Analysis Theory.
In this blog analysis, I will show how black people are portrayed in the media, and how this portrayal affects perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and understandings. The reason that I chose to use three video clips, instead of one, is because black people are mainly portrayed in the media in three different ways. They are portrayed as sexual and materialistic, wholesome and intelligent, and criminal and dangerous.

The first video clip is a music video entitled “Pop Bottles”, and performed by Birdman featuring Lil’ Wayne. This video is categorized as sexual and materialistic. Throughout the video there are many sexual references made and the women in the video are dressed in a very provocative way, and they also seem to participate in provocative actions such as dancing in a very sexual way. I interviewed a close male friend who is a heavy television viewer, and asked him what he thought about this video and the message it portrays about black people. He said that he saw black people as very sexual people, which can be supported by the number of accidental teen pregnancies that are rampant in the black community. This is an example of both mainstreaming and resonance. It is mainstreaming because sexual and materialistic media messages, such as the ones in the video, portrayed about black people has shaped his worldview. It is resonance because he related these views to the real world in the way he described the problem of accidental teenage pregnancies. My close male friend’s response can also be associated with first order effects and second order effects. His response is associated with first order effects because he has learned facts about the consequences that have occurred due to a supposed overly sexual community. These facts (coupled with the many sexual videos featuring black people rampant in the media) then caused him to make the assumption that the whole black community is overly sexual (second order effects). Blending is also part of this example because my friend’s reality was blended into the cultural mainstream of the views on sexuality in the black culture.

The second video is a clip from the popular sitcom, The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. Using comedic effects, this show portrays a family that grows, loves, and learns through different trials and tribulations that happen daily. This is a compilation of three different clip is categorized as wholesome and intelligent. In each of these particular clips Will, the main character, seems to switch role from being wholesome and intelligent at some instances, but at other instances he comes across as abrasive and “ghetto”, especially when making sexual advanced towards women. However, it should be noted that these sexual advances are no where near the level of sexuality of the previous music video. Overall, the show is more wholesome and intelligent than not. I asked a friend (a medium television watcher) that I met at college to view this clip and give me her reactions and what she thought the video portrayed about black people. Her response was that she has many black friends that are both wholesome and intelligent individuals. She said she often watched this show (and other shows like it), and felt that many black people were just as the show portrayed. She also recognized that there were black people (that she knew) that are not wholesome and intelligent, but not many. I found that her response contained resonance. It contained resonance because she could compare the wholesome and intelligent side of Will, and also the non-wholesome and unintelligent side of him, to people she knew.

The last video clip is a 4-minute clip depicting a group of black girls arguing with and beating up a white man on a New York subway. Although this clip is a very disturbing thing to watch, many more scenes like this, depicting criminal and dangerous black people are rampant in the media every day on shows like COPS. Although this clip was originally just a YouTube video, it was played countless times on both local and national television news stations. This clip is categorized as criminal and dangerous. Instead of interviewing someone else to learn their views on this clip, and how black people are portrayed, I decided to use my personal reactions and feelings. Even though I am a black person, and know what it feels like to be stereotyped because of a generalization, after watching this video (and others like it on shows like COPS), I could not help be pulled into the idea that many black people are indeed violent and criminal individuals. I also know black people who act like the girls in the video. Again, this is an example of mainstreaming because I ended up seeing the media messages that black people are criminal and violent, and believing the messages myself, even though I am a black person. This is also an example of resonance because I know people who act like the girls in the video, thus making the two realities the same. The Mean World Index also partly played a part in my views on the supposed criminal and violent aspects of the black community because one of the statements (you can’t be too careful in dealing with people) rang clear when seeing the portrayed violent and criminal aspects of the black girls in the clip.

Cultivation Analysis in the film Rain Man

This clip is an excerpt from the Oscar winning film Rain Man. To give some background, Charlie (Tom Cruise) is trying to get to Los Angeles and gain rightful custody of his older, mentally challenged brother, Raymond (Dustin Hoffman). Raymond has a certain type of autism, which enables his brain to function at superb speeds in some instances, but unable to perform fundamental tasks at other times. Charlie is attempting to get Raymond on a plane with him to Los Angeles, but Raymond is reluctant because of a study he was made aware of on television concerning plane crashes. Raymond is under the impression that plane crashes are a common occurrence, when in reality; air travel is the safest mode of transportation.

As we have learned, “cultivation analysis is a theory that predicts and explains the long-term formation of perceptions, understandings, and beliefs about the world as a result of consumption of media messages” (Turner 407). Raymond is exhibiting the belief that air travel is unsafe because of his exposure to a news story on plane crashes. Just as a person who is consistently viewing violently themed television programming and believes they are that much more susceptible to violence, Raymond is susceptible to the belief that plane crashes are common due to the programming he has watched.

Mainstreaming is the tendency for heavy viewers to perceive a similar culturally dominant reality to that pictured on the media, despite its countering what actually happens. The concept of mainstreaming can be related to this specific scene in Rain Man. Statistically, air travel is the safest mode of travel. But thousands of Americans are terrified of flying, because of the prospect of a crash. This is due to the fact that when a rare plane accident occurs, the news broadcasts are inundated with footage of it. But the news does not report on the thousands of car accidents that occur daily.

The belief by Raymond that air travel is dangerous is a result of a first order effect. This means that Raymond learned this fact directly from the media, contrary to a second order effect which involve hypothesizing about more general issues and assumptions. So Raymond’s fear of flying is due to direct news results, evidenced by the fact that he quotes every flight accident that has occurred to every major airline in the last twenty years.

Cultivation Analysis - NYPD Blue

These three clips are from the police television drama, NYPD Blue.

The three clips are short examples of the common roles women both play in this particular show and on television in general. We have three separate women who are fulfilling common societal misconceptions about women. In the male dominated world of television there is a continuous usage of women and their bodies for a purely sexual aspect. Whether it is a cop's girlfriend, a hooker on the street, or a woman getting ready to shower, each scene is an example of television developing the way people look at the world and each other.

The Cultivation Analysis theory examines the effect television has on its viewers over the course of time. Researchers have found people who watch more TV have distinctly different views of the world. Someone who watches a heavy dosage of TV every day will probably feel they are likely to be a victim of violence or that violence is much more prevalent than it really is. TV can warp viewers feelings about other issues as well. Television that depicts the dangers of inner-city violence may inspire racism in its viewers or television that bombards its viewers with corrupt politicians may find its audience highly suspicious of their governing body. TV blurs and blends the reality of those who watch it. Blurring occurs when educated people see the world similar to those with less education and blending happens when television "reality" blends with cultural reality.

One of the greatest ways television can warp reality is through its consistent use of women in a sexual manner. As shown in these clips and in many others, television that portrays its female characters as sexual objects inspires the same kinds of feelings in its audience. While you can not see the cultivation analysis theory exactly in that it is impossible to see the reaction people will have to these clips, the theory states that over time, people who watch women consistently portrayed in such a manner will see females that way. The audience even seems to have grown to expect such behavior from its television, nearly every night there is a hooker being questioned or attacked in a police drama. Likewise, women are shown without wearing clothing, or much less clothing so much it was become common place. You have to ask yourself why the woman in clip 3 is walking around in a robe, but is at the same time showing her under garments. Or why exactly is the woman in clip 1 have to be naked on camera? It is just as easy to show a woman "naked" without having to actually show her below the shoulders and above the knees. The clip almost seems excessive if not for the fact that women are routinely shown in movies naked for seemingly no cinematic reason.

These clips show the sexualized version of women that far too many people really thinks exist. The clips blur and blend reality enough times that we think it is normal behavior to see a hooker on every street corner or a woman openly showing off her body. Again, it is impossible to find a direct television example of this theory since it is only theorizing the reaction we, the audience, has after watching it! But, these clips are useful for examining the kind of reality TV has created for us, and as a helpful reminder that women are definitely not really like this.

Cultivation Analysis- A Clockwork Orange

The movie "Clockwork Orange" is about a young adult named Alex who is inclined to commit violent acts. He and his friends go around hurting other people and trashing others' properties. After accidentally killing a woman, Alex is sent to prison. In prison, he agrees to become part of an experimental program so that he can have a decreased sentence and be released sooner.

The experimental program entails Alex watching several videos. The second picture posted is a picture of Alex with his eyes held open. The hand in the picture is someone else putting drops in Alex's eyes so that his eyes don't dry up. The videos Alex is watching are all of violent acts of beatings, murders, rapes, war sequences, and other horrible acts of violence. This program lasts for several weeks.

At the end of the several weeks, Alex is scared of all violence despite the fact that he once committed many of those acts himself. To prove that he can be released from prison, someone starts shoving him and punching him to get a reaction. Alex just stood there scared not knowing what to do.

In Cultivation Analysis, George Gerbner talks about television and how it shapes our lives. One of the aspects in which television shapes our lives and opinions is violence. The common thought about tv and violence is that heavy viewers are more likely to be more violent and commit violent acts. But according to CA, heavy viewers are more likely to be afraid and stay away from violence. Heavy viewers are also more likely to view the world as mean.

One of the products of CA is mainstreaming, the tendency for heavy viewers to perceive a similar culturally dominant reality to that pictured on the media although this differs from actual reality. In this experimental program, Alex was a heavy viewer. For several weeks he watched horrifying videos to the point that he was scared of all violence. Although the videos he watched were comprised of violent acts that had actually happened, violence in real life does not occur in a continuous string in the way Alex saw it. So according to Gerbner, the fact that Alex watched these videos on end for several weeks would be the reason why Alex was afraid of violence and getting into a confrontation.

The other product of CA is resonance which occurs when a viewer's lived reality coincides with the reality pictured in the media. After Alex goes through the experimental program and is sent home, he is then faced with the obstacle of trying to start over in his home town. The people that he once hurt and that he once acted violently toward know of the program he went through and how he no longer acts violently. They therefore start acting violently toward him. Alex then begins to experience resonance since the "reality" that was portrayed to him in the videos was now coming to life as people were acting violently toward him. This is also a good illustration of what Gerbner calls "double dose" where Alex is first subjected to violence through the videos and then it is reinforced through getting beat up. It is evident that Alex is a prime example of the concept of cultivation analysis in terms of violence.

The Narrative Paradigm - Good Will Hunting

This clip is from the movie “Good Will Hunting.”

Here Matt Damon’s character, Will Hunting, is at an interview for a job at the National Security Agency (NSA). Will Hunting is literally a genius, but at this point in the movie lacks any motivation to do anything substantial with his gift. When the interviewer asks Will why he should work for the NSA, Will uses Narrative Rationality in the Narrative Paradigm to tell the interviewer why he in fact should not work for the NSA.

Narrative Rationality has two parts, coherence and fidelity. Three types of coherence are structural, material and characterological. Structural coherence deals with the way the story’s plot unfolds. While it is apparent that Will’s story is based purely in hypotheticals, his thought process of how his work at the NSA could theoretically affect a neighbor or friend from his hometown is believable. He believed that taking part in codebreaking overseas would inevitably affect lives, oil, and fish.

Material coherence has to do with the facts in one story as compared to the facts in another story concerning similar people and events. Codebreaking is known to be used in breaking foregin transmissions. The military would use the information garnered from this code to attack the enemy there and it certainly would result in death. This new ally of a country would potentially be a site for outsourcing and could indeed cost a returning soldier a job. Human beings are sleazy creatures and would in fact manipulate war, death, and the oil market to line their own pockets.

Characterological coherence refers to the believability of the characters in a story. Will uses stereotypes to prove his point. Politicians who would rather send Marines to their death instead of their own children, scheming oil companies that would manipulate war to make a profit, and a down-on-his-luck veteran to accentuate that repercussions of his potential job at the NSA. Though, yes, the story is not based on actual events the point gets through as to why taking the job would be detrimental.

The other part of narrative rationality is fidelity, the credibility of a story. As stated above, the movie watcher is aware of the fact that Will's story is not based in actual events. While the events in the story are vague, they are plausible even if they are a little far-fetched.

The Narrative Paradigm: It's The Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown

In the movie It’s the Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown, Linus uses storytelling to attempt to persuade his friends to believe in the great pumpkin. He uses elements of Walter Fisher’s Narrative Paradigm in order to make the others wait for the great pumpkin in the pumpkin patch, instead of trick or treating. Linus believes in the great pumpkin, even though his friends are skeptical of his existence. Linus’ sister Lucy is embarrassed that her brother believes in the great pumpkin. Eventually sally, Charlie Brown’s little sister, waits with Linus in the pumpkin patch, but the great pumpkin never visits.

Linus’ story lacks good reasons, or the value of accepting a story as true and worthy of acceptance, according to Fisher. Linus’ story lacks any historical, biographical, or cultural substance. His story only contains character. Unlike Santa Clause who has a rich history, and cultural background, the great pumpkin appears to be Linus’ fabrication, and his friends, especially Charlie Brown who believes in Santa Clause, does not believe the story.

Linus’ attempts to persuade his friends ultimately fails because he lacks narrative rationality and the principles of coherence: structural, material, and characterological.

Linus’ story does not flow smoothly, so it suffers from a lack of structural coherence. According to Fisher, structural coherence is the ability of a narrative to flow smoothly. Linus’ story about the great pumpkin is juvenile and fragmented, so Linus’ friends are not able to fully believe it. He gives a fractured account of a being that resembles Santa Clause, except it is a pumpkin that rises from the pumpkin patch. Linus’ story also lacks material coherence, of the degree of congruence between stories. Linus’ is the only account of the great pumpkin. Because he is the only one who believe in it, the story lacks material coherence; there are no other accounts of the great pumpkin to back up Linus’ story. Linus uses characterological coherence, or the believability of a character in a story, to support his claims about the great pumpkin. He confronts Charlie Brown about his believe in Santa Clause, and says that it is no different than believing in the great pumpkin.

A good persuasive story has fidelity, or truthfulness and reliability. Although Linus believes in the great pumpkin, he can not convince the others that he truly exists. Although Linus builds a good argument by comparing the great pumpkin to Santa Clause, the others remain unconvinced. Sally is the only one who waits with Linus in the pumpkin patch, but only because she is in love with Linus. She eventually becomes frustrated when the great pumpkin does not show up, and laments having missed Halloween while waiting in the pumpkin patch.

The Narrative Paradigm: A Time to Kill

This segment from the 1996 feature film A Time to Kill provides a good example of Walter Fisher’s Narrative Paradigm. Set in Canton, Mississippi, the premise of the film is as follows: after Carl Lee Hailey’s (Samuel Jackson) daughter has been brutally raped by two white men he seeks the counsel of Jake Brigance (Matthew McConaughey); afraid that the two men may be acquitted due to a deep-seated racism in the area. Hailey acquires an M-16 assault rifle and kills the two men and he is immediately arrested without protest. Brigance plans to plead not guilty on the behalf of Hailey citing temporary insanity.

In the beginning of the clip, Brigance says that he had “a great summation all worked out”, but he abandons it for a story instead. He explains how all the “legal maneuvering” was getting in the way of the truth, that very truth which he is only able to reveal by recounting the story to the jury members. His story is told so well, that you can see the audience hanging on to each word, as he invokes feelings of sympathy among audience members for Carl Lee Hailey’s plea. Many of the jurors, even those who are white and had previously expressed racist beliefs in the film, are persuaded by Brigance’s powerful story.

Without coherence and fidelity, two integral components of narrative rationality, Brigance’s story may have not won the support of the jury. Brigance’s rendition of the gruesome story (with particular emphasis on the progression of heinous deeds performed by the two white men) has definite structural coherence. The story moves from beginning to end with no holes in-between. Material coherence is imminent as a result of testimony provided by other witnesses, as well as the evidence that has been found at the scene of the crime. Characterological coherence is especially important in this particular example. The fact that Brigance is white and a respected member of the community definitely gives him more credibility in the eyes of the jury.

The second important component of narrative rationally is fidelity. To finish his story, he asks the audience to imagine that the girl is white which allows the jury to better relate to Hailey, as well as better understand why he acted as he did. They understand what their children mean to them and the story suddenly becomes more true and tangible to them.

All of these elements combined provide good reasons why Hailey was innocent. The value of family and children is universal, and allows the white members to better relate to the plea of Hailey, who they otherwise would view as unequal because of his ethnicity. Brigance skillfully incorporates the audience’s history, biography, culture, and character into his closing argument in a way that invites the jury to see passed their prejudice.

“What is it in us that seeks the truth, is it our minds? Or is it our hearts?” This question alone addresses humans’ innate tendency to often evaluate truth through narrative rationality, not through a collection of facts and statistics.

The Narrative Paradigm Presented Through the Bangladesh Genocide

A few decades ago in Bangladesh, genocide occurred by Pakistan which left many killed, as well as many women distraught and emotionally scrambled due to the horrific crime of rape. NBC tells the story of a victim, Sieba, a sixteen year old who was one of the many who were victimized by Bangladesh’s oppressors.

Her story is an example of the Narrative Paradigm, an idea proposed by Walter Fisher. The Narrative Paradigm is the belief that humans are storytellers and their values, emotions, and aesthetic considerations ground our beliefs and behaviors. The assumption that humans are naturally storytellers is shown when we view the video about the dilemma in Sieba’s life. When we hear her story, not by anyone else’s account but hers, we feel for her because her emotions rattle ours, causing us to understand the horrors she has faced and how what has occurred is horrible and intolerable.

It is true that we are more persuaded by a good story rather than a good argument. NBC created a solid image of how life has been for the women living in Bangladesh and the sacrifices they have to make. After the genocides, life changed greatly for the women in the area. They were raped, impregnated with children they did not want, and were looked down upon by their own people, living a life of solitude and despair, all against their will.

After viewing the video, I was persuaded by the story presented and realized that much needs to be done to prevent this from happening in the future. My values were the same as that of those telling the story.

Other assumptions that Fisher presented were that a story’s worth is based on “good reasons,” including history, biography, culture and character. The Bangladesh genocide shows the history of the area, how it impacted the culture, and how the main character, Sieba, presents her character, a tortured soul. Also, the story has truth behind it, testimonies and consistencies throughout, explaining why the genocide happened and what has changed in the lifestyle of those affected by it.

This clip is an example of one of the three types of coherence: characterological coherence. Judging by Sieba’s testimony, the viewer can believe what she is experiencing due to her facial gestures, a solemn and quiet attitude. That and the narrator’s explanation of what she has gone through make her believable. When we hear that Sieba’s parents look after her, but realize that no one will ever marry her, makes us understand that rape has ruined her life, and it was completely against her control.

Lastly, the Narrative Paradigm looks at the key concept of fidelity with the story, or its credibility. Fisher explained that there are sets of values that appeal to the audience, which is the primary method for assessing narrative fidelity. When a viewer sees the video, he is met with a set of values that appeals to him or her, realizing that they feel the same way that these victims do and therefore believe the story and what these people have experienced.

Narrative Paradigm Theory in Monty Python

This clip is from the British television show, Monty Python’s Flying Circus. In the “Dead Parrot Sketch,” John Cleese goes to the pet store to complain to Michael Palin that the parrot he has purchased is dead. Palin uses story telling to try and convince Cleese that the parrot is perfectly alright. Cleese uses Narrative Rationality of the Narrative Paradigm Theory to decide whether or not to believe Palin’s story.

The two aspects of narrative rationality are coherence and fidelity. Coherence refers to the consistency of a story. One type of coherence, or lack there of, displayed in the Dead Parrot Sketch is structural coherence, or the way a story flows. Palin’s story is choppy and inconsistent, giving Cleese reason not to believe him. Palin jumps back and forth between subjects, often bringing in irrelevant information, like the “lovely plumage” of the parrot. His explanation of the immobile parrot changes as time goes by. First he says that it’s resting, but later he claims it is stunned. He moves one to say it’s pining for the fields. Cleese chooses not to believe him because of the lack of structural coherence in Palin’s obviously improvised and constantly changing story.

Material coherence has to do with information learned in other stories about the same subject. Cleese reminds Palin that when he bought the parrot, Palin assured him that is was not moving because it was "tired and shagged out." Cleese has been told multiple stories involving the parrot, none of which check out with each other. This leads Cleese to believe Palin even less.

Fidelity is the truthfulness and reliability of a story. Palin is severely lacking in fidelity, mostly because his story is that the parrot is alive, while it is dead in Cleese’s hands. There is physical evidence that contradicts his facts. Palin claims that the parrot is sleeping, but Cleese proves him wrong by unsuccessfully trying to wake it up, destroying any fidelity Palin has in his argument.

The Narrative Paradigm in Nicki's Story of Racial Profiling

Racial profiling is a very serious issue in today’s society. Day in and day out, stories are told of how certain people in certain situations were discriminated against, or treated differently because of their race. As seen here, Nicki Sok tells a story of how he and his brother were enjoying a great day while traveling to a movie, and came across an act of racial profiling. Throughout this narrative, various examples and assumptions of the Narrative Paradigm are present.

The first of the Narrative Paradigm’s assumptions, humans are naturally storytellers, is shown from Nicki choosing to describe his unfortunate experience in the form of a story. This event being told in story form allows for a deeper impact within the minds of audience members in the process of Nicki conveying his emotions at the time. In terms of the Narrative Paradigm’s second and third assumptions, Nicki’s story holds up in the minds of his listeners because it is both believable and easy to relate to. Because of the knowledge his listeners had of previous racial profiling occurrences in the past, Nicki’s listeners were able to view his story as one that is both logical and credible, illustrating the second assumption of the Narrative Paradigm. The third assumption involves a narrative’s rationality being affected through its listener’s history, biography, culture, and character. Both history and biography allow for the persuasion of Nicki’s listeners through their recollection of historical events in which racial profiling existed, and their relation to a time when they too were bullied and humiliated. The material ultimately persuading Nicki’s listeners is that which is relevant to them personally, not that which works according to a set code of logic or persuasion.

When considering the fourth assumption of the Narrative Paradigm, the narrative’s rationality is dependent on the internal consistency and truth within it. Because Nicki’s story most likely strikes home with how listeners would’ve felt if put in that same situation, there is no question regarding the internal consistency and degree of truth present in his narrative. The paradigm’s fifth assumption involves the experiences of individuals within society as a set of selected stories, ultimately resulting in society living life in a continual process of re-creation. Nicki’s narrative follows this assumption through the idea of his listeners changing the way they think about racial profiling as a whole. From viewing how personally affected Nicki was by the events on that particular day, it would come as no surprise to me if his narrative’s impact on particular listeners was significant. As a whole, the story Nicki told about being racially profiled was one which demonstrated the various assumptions of the Narrative Paradigm successfully.

No Country for Old Men, the Coens' Masterpiece of Narrative Storytelling

The Coen brothers have been defining and redefining storytelling throughout their entire careers. As writers, they utilize narrative storytelling techniques to the fullest. Although they create fiction, they still seem to follow the guideline set popularized and accepted by Walter Fisher’s Narrative Paradigm. Although the Coen brothers usually write their own original screenplays, the one that will be discussed here is the new film adaptation of Cormac McCarthy’s No Country for Old Men. This is only the second time the Coens have used outside material in their films. The Coens use many of the assumptions of this theory in researching, writing, and/or adapting their screenplays. They heavily research the era, settings, locations, and overall times of their material. For instance, the Coens used an old picture of a 1970s man at a bar with a unique haircut that was relatively popular at the time for Anton Chigurh’s, Javier Bardem’s character, haircut and clothing style. They also shot on location for the most part depending on budgets. As for the characterization, these characters are very believable. Josh Brolin plays Llewellyn Moss, a hunter who stumbles across a drug deal gone bad while out for the day in one of the Texas desert fields. From the minute he touches this money, Brolin’s character shows the signs of what almost anyone would do in the situation. He begins to think about what to do with all of it, but is overcome by human instinct to aid one of the barely alive drug dealers who was left for dead by bringing him some water. He is discovered by the drug dealer clean-up squad and immediately was on the run. Two parties are now searching for the lost money. The aging Sherriff Tom Bell played by Tommy Lee Jones and the psychopathic hitman Anton Chigurh played by Bardem. Sherriff Bell is struggling with a rationality paradigm as well as a good reason paradigm. His upbringing and experiences are being challenged by the new world in which he lives as an aging Sherriff, making it increasingly difficult for him to cope with the transition of his laid back ways of old and the take-action times in which he lives now. Chigurh has left a bloodbath across Bell’s county and outlying areas, which Bell does not fully understand. Bell just knows that he must find Moss before it is too late. Anton Chigurh is a bit more complicated of a character. His paradigm as a character is based on a twisted reality view and a morbid set of rules that he is bound to. He kills at will, sometimes for no reason, others part of a sadistic game of chance by offering his potential victims a coin flip to decide their fates. His brutality, unleashed with a silenced shotgun and an air gun used to kill cattle, is part of a paradigm that many people do understand and accept as something that can happen. Media in these times spares no detail to the audience, depicted grisly acts in their entirety. All of these characters are connected through their actions and reactions in the story.
As for the storytelling, the Coens tell the tale through use of unconventional narrative in the way that there is no defined middle or end. Everything begins, but it is up to the watcher and listener to piece together the events, as it is in real life. It has a great sense of coherence, as everything that goes on relates to each other, acting like glue between the characters, even if they do not meet on screen. No Country has all of the coherence aspects covered. Structural is covered with the smooth running editing, material with the storylines of the three main characters constantly linking back to each other, and characterlogical in the ways explained before about the believability of the characters in the movie. For good reasons, the Coens continue to wow audiences with their stories, adapted or original, creating unforgettable settings, characters, and a style not seen by many filmmakers anymore. They truly are some of the best storytellers of this era.

JFK Speech to Berlin

John Fitzgerald Kennedy is noted by some to be one of our nation's most inspirational presidents. As seen by this, one of his most famous speeches, he was an undoubtedly captivating orator. Along with Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln, JFK has given some of the greatest speeches in the history of our nation. This speech is known as the "Ich Bin Ein Berliner" speech. In it, he addresses a crowd in West Berlin, the sight of much controversy and debate throughout the entirety of the Cold War. He manages to relate to an entire group of people with a different culture and history, all because of the way in which he delivers the speech.

Primarily, Kennedy utilizes the three proofs of rhetoric to perfection. He exemplifies every aspect of ethos. For his character, there is none better. He appears to be a genuine person who is concerned with the plight of the Western Germans over the Communist doctrines of Eastern Europe. His intelligence is unquestionable and is made obvious in the speech. Kennedy is a Harvard alum who can hold his own in any debate, discussion, or dilemma. In terms of his goodwill, Kennedy made it clear that the United States had the backs of people of West Germany without question. By doing so, he establishes a sense of camaraderie with the audience, thus winning their attention from there on out.

For his logos, JFK provides some strong points to promote the interestes of Western Berlin, along with all of Western civilization, against the foes behind the Iron Curtain. For every grievance someone may have against West Berlin, he repeats over and over "Let them come to Berlin!" to see for themselves how vastly different the two sides of the city truly are. Finally for his pathos, Kennedy exudes sentiments of concern for the people of West Berlin, while showing a slight indignation of the leaders of East Europe. His speech is one of confidence and hope; confidence that good will prevail over evil, and hope in the eventual spread of democracy throughout the world.

In addition to sticking to all of the proofs of rhetoric, Kennedy also uses all of the canons perfectly. In his arrangement, he provides a convincing introduction, body, and conclusion by connecting each individual portion of the speech with the phrase "Ich bin ein Berliner." His style is one of elegance and eloquance. He realizes that this is a serious subject matter and the German people are a serious and reserved people. As a result, his delivery is not over the top and meant to garner laughter, but is moreso intended to give a people torn apart by the ravages of World War II hope for a bringter future. In essense, John Fitzgerald Kennedy provided hope for America as well. He was a breath of fesh air, a new face to mix up the stagnant old guard which had ruled Washington for so long. Unfortunately, he was unable to see his message lived out.

The Rhetoric

I felt that this video truly portrayed the rhetoric because it used several available means of persuasion to get its message across. The video is based on one of Barack Obama's speeches and was turned into a song by several famous people. All of these components are highly persuasive means of communication.

Obama's actual speech in this video is very deliberative because his goal was political and directed towards the wellbeing of the public through his messages of hope and change. This presentation effectively uses the three proofs. The Ethos was extremely effective because many people love and trust Obama, as well people are big fans of the stars who created the song and care about their opinions. The logos or logic surrounding Barack's arguments was convincing as well as he used the stories of immigrants and our founding fathers as examples of the country's hope. The presence of Pathos was very strong in this clip as well. Not only was Barack emotive, but the famous people who sang in the video were as well. They all portrayed emotions of love, determination, urgency, and hope.

The canons of this presentation were beautifully composed. The invention was to turn Barack’s already influential speech into a song. The style of his speech is hopeful and deliberate, as well as eloquent because Barack demonstrates all of those qualities in his language. The delivery was unique because it was not only a speech but a song as well, sung and spoken from memory. I believe that this presentation is a truly remarkable example of effective rhetoric because it encompasses all of the qualities Aristotle outlined in his studies of rhetoric in an original manner.

Organizational Culture Theory in "Office Space"

This clip, a seven minute excerpt from the Mike Judge comedy "Office Space," shows Organizational Culture Theory through the eyes of Peter, Michael and Samir, software developers at a company called Initech.

Several different aspects of the Communicative Performance are shown. First, Samir and Michael show a social performance, acting politely to the woman delivering memos, even though she stumbles over Samir's name and fixates on Michael's last name -- Bolton. Michael then displays a passion performance, when he tells the others that he could program a computer virus that could cripple the company. Peter then suggests a social ritual performance in getting out of the office and going to Chotchkey's for coffee.

Here, the waiter repeats what the woman delivering memos said -- "Sounds like someones got a case of the Mondays" -- a verbal symbol shared by both the office workers and the nearby restaurant that they frequent. After exiting the restaurant, the three encounter a co-worker ranting and raving about downsizing, in a passion performance. The staff meeting he mentions ends up being an enculturation performance, familiarizing the workers with two efficiency experts.

All of these performances show the overall culture at Initech, the spider web that the workers all weave. It's a depressed, nervous, paranoid atmosphere, and this is reflected in the low morale of the workers.

Organizational Culture Theory in "The Office"

The clip above is of an episode of NBC's hit "The Office" condensed, or JAMMED as its called, into the ten minute block allotted by YouTube. The show focuses on the Scranton branch of the paper company of Dunder-Mifflin. "The Office" as a series has many examples of organizational culture but for the purposes of this blog we will discuss examples from the episode "Safety Training".

The first example of cultural performances in organization is in the opening seconds, where Andy Bernard and Pam (Jenna Fischer) show examples of social performances by greeting each other and exchanging small talk while Pam welcomes Andy back to the office, after his stint in anger management. His conversations with Jim ( John Krazinski) and Dwight (Rainn Wilson) seem to be more political performances than social, although they may start out as social. Jim refuses to give Andy power by calling him by his "new" name and Dwight shuns Andy in an Amish fashion. While Jim and Dwight had always been at Dunder-Mifflin Scranton, Andy was one of the workers who eventually came from the Stanford branch, and they continue to exercise their power over him, as no one likes Andy.

There are many examples of ritual performances and enculturation rituals throughout the episode. Both Darrell's and Toby's safety training rituals are enculturation rituals; they try, and fail, to teach the office about different types of safety. It is also mentioned that these safety orientations are supposed to take place once every year or after every accident, and it is noted that they never make it a full year. This is also an example of passion performances. Michael Scott's "performance" of a safety orientation is more of a combination of an enculturation performance and a passion performance. After Pam points out to Michael that Darrell's lecture was more captivating because it had visuals he takes it upon himself to stage a suicide attempt in order to "inform" on the dangers of depression. It attempts to be informative, in Michael's eyes, but is really exaggerated and over the top.

The constant betting is an example of ritual performance; it is a social ritual. They bet on how many jelly-beans are at reception, how long it will take Kelly to explain NetFlix to her boyfriend Ryan (B.J. Novak) and how many times she will say "awesome" and mention romantic comedies, and if Creed will notice that the apple he was eating was replaced by a potato. The Dunder-Mifflin employees often make bets in the office and play pranks on each other; they have even created an Olympics stemming from invented games played during the workday. Michael's eccentricities and Jim and Dwight's fighting are also social rituals that the rest of the office is used to, almost so that they are task rituals, as common as checking one's voice mail. Those in the office are used to having to save Michael from himself. Each of these rituals have been introduced to viewers, much as they were introduced to Ryan, the temp, during the pilot and first few episodes.

Organizational Culture Theory in The Devil Wears Prada

After learning about Organizational Culture Theory on Tuesday the first example that popped into my head was the movie The Devil Wears Prada. It is an over the top example of the theory so I am not surprised that another student thought of it as well. I chose another scene from the movie that demonstrates almost all of the communicative performances involved in Organizational Culture Theory.
In the first scene of the clip there is an enculturation performance between Andy (Anne Hathaway) and Nigel (Stanley Tucci). Stanley is making it perfectly clear that to be an acceptable employee at Runway Andy has to lose weight and wear designer clothes. Physical symbols that represent Runway (and its employees) are designer brands and trendy appearances. He makes a comment about how he will never find anything in the Runway closet to fit a size six, and that Hathaway’s character is in desperate need of Gucci and Chanel. To be an employee of Runway she must be thin, fashionable and pretty.
In the second scene the two female employees are participating in a political performance by gossiping about Hathaway’s character. Emily (Emily Blunt) is telling a coworker the story of when she first met Andy, and how she knew by her appearance that she would be an “utter disaster” at Runway. There is also an example of social performance in the second scene. When Hathaway enters the room the three girls participate in a polite, but tense, exchange. Polite comments are exchanged even though all three girls are aware that they do not get along.
Finally in the last scene there is an example of ritual performance when Andy performs a task ritual. She enters her boss Miranda’s (Meryl Streep) office and places a glass of water on her desk and magazines (something that she must do every morning before Miranda arrives). You can also see in the background that Miranda throws her coat and bag on Andy’s desk before she enters her office (a ritual shown in the clip above that happens every single morning).

Organizational Culture Theory- The Devil Wears Prada

In the 2006 film “The Devil Wears Prada” Andy (Anne Hathaway) plays a young girl who is hired as the boss’s secretary by the company Runway. As soon as she is hired she hears horrific story after story of the head of the company Miranda (Meryl Streep). Employee after employee expresses their own tales of Miranda, none of which consist of any positivity. Within the Organizational Culture Theory there are different types of communicative performances. In this scenario passion performance is represented. Once employees hear that Andy is Miranda’s new secretary they enthusiastically overwhelm her with horror stories of Miranda and her past relationships with her secretaries.

In the clip shown above many of these communicative performances are present. The most obvious is ritual performance. First, Andy demonstrates a task ritual. Each day she does exactly as Miranda tells her. Every morning Miranda throws her jacket and purse wherever she’d like on Andy’s desk and it becomes Andy’s responsibility to put these items in their correct location. Also it becomes Andy’s responsibility to fulfill whatever task Miranda asks of her each day. For example, it may be something as easy as retrieving someone’s phone number or something ridiculous such as fetching the next Harry Potter book before it is even released for Miranda’s daughters. Next, Andy demonstrates personal ritual as well. Every day she is responsible to check the voicemail and email for the company. Thirdly, every year the company Runway attends Fashion Week in Paris. It is Miranda’s secretary’s responsibility each year to make sure all aspects of the trip are organized and perfect.

Finally, this clip depicts political performance as well. By throwing her jacket and purse on her secretary’s desk everyday and barking orders, Miranda demonstrates the power she possesses over her employees. She “maintains the bottom line” at Runway and is not afraid to show it.

Group Think in "The Usual Suspects"

The video above contains two clips from the 1995 movie "The Usual Suspects". The movie tells the story of five criminals (Michael McManus, Dean Keaton, Fred Fenster, Todd Hockney, and Verbal Kint) and their dealings with a mysterious man named Keyser Soze. The first part of the clip shows the men standing in a police lineup. The men have all committed crimes in the past, but this time they are brought in for a crime none of them actually committed; the police just needed a scapegoat. In the second part of the video the men are angry that they have been brought in under false charges and McManus proposes that they get revenge on the police. All of the men, save Keaton, agree to take part in the act.

Both of the clips exhibit most of the antecedent conditions of groupthink. For one thing, the men have good potential for group cohesiveness. This is because they are somewhat homogeneous and have things in common: they are all men and they are all criminals. Homogeneity fosters group cohesiveness. Another of these antecedent conditions is that the group is well insulated. Group insulation refers to a group being unaffected by influences outside of itself. The fact that McManus proposes getting revenge on the police shows that he and the group do not care about the law (an outside influence). The group also exhibits no impartial leadership; the members of the group all have personal interests in the outcome of the crime they are planning because they are all seeking retribution against the police.

A few symptoms of groupthink can be observed from the group. The men must believe that they are somewhat invincible and will not get caught when they do their "job". This illusion of invulnerability is one of the symptoms of groupthink. Also, the men must believe that the act they are planning is moral and the right thing to do (otherwise, would they be planning it?). Their belief in the inherent morality of the group is another symptom of groupthink. There is one dissenter in the group, Keaton. He is trying to stay away from a life of crime and says that he will not participate in the group's plan. A little later in the movie, however, the group places pressure on the dissenter. Keaton eventually agrees to participate.

Some of the elements of groupthink are not as apparent as others in this particular example, but I feel that this still exemplifies the theory.

Groupthink Shown Through 300

This is a clip from the Zack Snyder’s 2007 film, 300. In this clip, Queen Gorgo is attempting to convince the Spartan counsel to send the army to war and assist her husband, King Leonidas, in his fight against the Persian army. She does all that is in her power to convince the counsel that it is a necessary act. Unfortunately most of the counsel partakes in groupthink.

After viewing this clip one can see that the group would have a tendency to succumb to groupthink. First and foremost, the counsel is made up of very similar individuals. The counsel is made up of a small group of men from the same city who dress, talk, and act alike. Besides this, the fact that they all have the same goal, to prosper in Sparta, also adds to their homogeneity. Also they have high group insulation because they are used to making decisions in the group and tend to think as one. These lead to their overwhelming cohesiveness which is often an antecedent of groupthink.

Then comes the fact that this is an extremely important decision and is most likely causing a good deal of stress on the counsel. Also, the fact that this is a decision that must be made nearly immediately also likely leads to increased levels of stress. When stress is higher and the decision is rushed, the counsel is more likely to make a rash decision favoring the one they had in the first place (not to go to war).

The two overestimations of the group also contribute to the groupthink. First of all the group has the illusion of invulnerability. They believed that since they were technically in control of the army that they had all the power. They also believed that not sending the army to war was doing the moral action. This belief in the inherent morality of the group is a symptom of groupthink.

Finally, the group’s closed-mindedness can be seen as a symptom of groupthink. First of all, the counsel’s out-group stereotypes can be seen. Since the queen is not part of the counsel, she is a woman, etc, they see her as an outsider and they do not wish to listen to her reasoning. Relating to this is the group’s collective rationalization. The counsel doesn’t believe that they will be going to war either way and so they don’t think it is necessary to send the army out. They ignore the Queen’s warnings which might make them change their decision.

Overall, one can clearly see that the counsel in the film 300 partook in groupthink. There are many ways that it could’ve been avoided. First and foremost they could’ve increased the open-mindedness and diversity of the group. They also could’ve taken steps in the beginning so the decision was not so rushed. Finally, if they made an adequate decision-making procedure groupthink may have been evaded.

High School Groupthink in "Mean Girls"

Groupthink is often focused on groups in an office setting. However, groups exist everywhere and they all make decisions of some sort, even if they are just everyday choices. In the movie “Mean Girls” there is a group in the high school known as the “Plastics.” This group of girls is highly homogeneous; they are all the same grade and all essentially want the same things. Regina George (blonde on the left) plays the role of the leader in the group.

The three girls have a set way of doing things. Everyday they have a specific way of dressing and others rules are established. Many of things they do to other students are mean and unnecessary, but they are too afraid to speak up to each other. Most of this is due to their lack of impartial leadership. Regina is only the leader because she is the first to speak up. Even if the other two have ideas they restrain themselves. The three of them are very cohesive because they all want to get along.

The group is very isolated which builds their groupthink. They don’t really pay much attention to what is going on with others outside of their group. They also suffer from overestimation of their group. They think they are the end all and be all of their high school, when in reality they are not. They also experience a lot of pressure toward uniformity because they want to get along just to get along. They do this so they don’t injure their friendship in any way. At many times the other two are silent while Regina makes decisions for the whole; this creates an illusion of uniformity.

Most of the film shows how an outsider actually breaks down the groupthink. A new girl, Kady, comes to the school and becomes friends with the “Plastics.” She sees the wrongdoing in their decisions and actions. By befriending the three girls, Kady, partakes in whistle blowing because she speaks her mind when others the girls would have chosen to stay quiet. Eventually the girls go their separate ways after realizing that the group was lacking in many things. This brings an end to their groupthink.

Groupthink in The Nightmare Before Christmas

In this clip from Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas a Halloween Town meeting is being held. In the scene, Jack Skellington is attempting to describe the wonders of Christmas to the citizens of Halloween Town. He begins by enthusiastically telling the townspeople about his journey to Christmas Town and the wonders that he saw there in an attempt to convince them to celebrate the holiday.

When looking at the townspeople of Halloween town, one sees a group that is very prone to groupthink. The group was highly homogenous, they each live the same town and each one of them lives to do two things, celebrate Halloween and scare people, they are also very cohesive because they are all friends and coworkers. The group is also susceptible to groupthink because of their lack of an impartial leader; Jack will say anything to get what he wants. The group also does not take any kind of vote; it is just assumed that their decision is unanimous.

The Groupthink that occurs in this scene starts to unfold shortly after Jacks speech begins. Despite the fact that the people of Halloween Town do not understand what Christmas is, they quickly pick up Jack’s enthusiasm about the holiday and begin to run with it. The group completely misunderstands what Christmas is and unintentionally warped its true nature into something frightening rather than jolly. In doing so, the group assumes that it is inherently moral. They feel that their changes will make the holiday better and more enjoyable. Also, the townspeople do not consider the fact that their actions are selfish and that they are planning to take over something that is not rightfully theirs. Also, the townspeople exhibit another stereotype of groupthink, they have an illusion of invulnerability; they feel that there will be no opposition to their take-over of Christmas and that everyone will enjoy the changes that they make to it.

Initially, Jack attempted to explain that the townspeople misunderstood the true nature of Christmas but eventually the group stopped listening to him in their excitement. In that manner, the group assumed an illusion of unanimity; they assumed that Jack still supported the idea. When that happened, Jack decided to self-censor himself and gives into what the group desired. Once the group had decided to celebrate their twisted version of Christmas, Jack decided that obtaining his goal of celebrating Christmas was more important than keeping the townspeople’s understanding of Christmas accurate. In doing so, he assumed the role of self-appointed mindguard. He chose to create a veil that would be appealing to the townspeople rather than telling them the truth which may change their opinion.

Overall, Jack’s behavior and the behavior of the group as a whole exhibited many of the symptoms of groupthink. If Jack had stuck up for what Christmas actually was and had not withheld information from the townspeople, groupthink might not have happened. Also, if the group had taken precautions against making irrational decisions such as creating a proper decision-making system groupthink could have been avoided as well.

The Canons of Rhetoric

Martin Luther King Jr. - "I Have a Dream" speech



Martin Luther King Jr. is seen above giving his famous “I Have a Dream,” speech to an audience at the Lincoln Memorial on August 28, 1963. This is a prime example of Aristotle’s Canons of Rhetoric.

Firstly, Invention can be seen by the vast amount of knowledge and information Dr. King brings forth to the people. He draws upon instances of the past, such as slavery and the Emancipation Proclamation, and then bluntly describes the present. He is fully aware of his audience, and uses the emotionally pungent topic of inequality and injustice to aid in his persuasion.

There is a clear introduction to Dr. King’s speech; he makes himself personable to his audience by saying, “I am happy to join with you today.” He then captures their attention by pointing out that today “will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.” Now that the audience is fully enthralled he continues to move towards the purpose of his speech. Dr. King does so by saying that after the Emancipation Proclamation was signed, “100 years later the Negro still is not free.” He continues to list some of the problems which still occur today and ends his introduction with saying “now is the time” to start action.

The body is made up primarily of the summation of injustices faced by the African American people. He uses supporting details, such as the inability for some people to vote and police brutality, to support his argument. He also gives personal insight into his hopes and dreams for the future by stating that his four children will “not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

The speech’s conclusion appropriately summarizes Martin Luther King Jr.’s points and arouses the emotions of the audience. He uses the repetition of the phrase “let freedom ring” to reconnect with the listeners and emphasize his belief of the importance of freedom and justice. Finally, the last line of his speech, “all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!" fully summarizes his intentions while energizing his listeners.

The canon of style can also be directly seen in the above clip. A prime example is the use of metaphor. In Dr. King’s introduction he says that “America gave the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked insufficient funds” and that he refuses to believe that the “bank of justice is bankrupt” and that they, the people, have come to “cash this check” because it will provide the “riches of freedom and security of justice.” While at first seemingly complex, this metaphor provides tangible and easily understood imagery for the concept Dr. King is trying to convey.

Memory can be seen through Dr. King’s exemplary delivery skills. He has mastered the ability to maintain eye contact, use vocal cues and deliver his emotion to the audience. He has a strong opinion and his body language lets the audience know that he is passionate and that he means business.

Martin Luther King Jr. is known to be one of the most influential men in history, which is most likely partially due to his excellent oratory skills. He is a master of the canons of rhetoric, invention, arrangement, style, delivery and memory, and is therefore extremely persuasive.

Group Think Theory: Gilmore Girls

This episode of Gilmore Girls takes place at a regular town meeting. Taylor Doose (Michael Winters), is in charge of running town meetings, and in this particular episode brings the relationship of Lorelai Gilmore (Lauren Graham) and Luke Danes (Scott Paterson) to the attention of the congregation. The conditions of these meetings promote high cohesiveness on the town’s part, makes group problem solving a unified process and is also a complex undertaking.

The viewer observes that in accordance with the Group Think Theory, the town meetings reveal the assembly as being a problem-solving group. They express great cohesiveness in trying to solve this issue for the betterment of the town. While concurrence seeking, Taylor uses past examples to gain the town’s awareness of the severity of this issue. Their homogeneity is that they wish not to have the same conflict in which had occurred 10 years ago with Fay Wellington and Art Brush. This dilemma was said to have affected the town’s economy, as well as the unification of the town as a whole. Although Luke tries to express how irrational the towns’ thinking is, Taylor acts as a self-appointed mindguard by not allowing Luke to convey his side of the argument to the group.

Internal and external stress is put on Luke and Lorelai. They are at the beginning of their relationship and by the town expressing their concern for their relationship puts incredible amounts of stress on them. At the end of the clip, it is also apparent that Luke, after several attempts end the argument, decides that it would be best to put the issue to rest. He was pressured toward uniformity in the sense that this issue would not be resolved until a decision on how to handle it was met. This is when Luke gives his word that if the relationship does not work out that he will move out of town.

The towns people use collective rationalization by thinking this is the best way in which to handle the situation, while not observing what would happen if the breakup were to occur. Although they would keep the Dragonfly Inn, they would lose Luke’s Diner, which those who watch the show would know, is a staple in Stars Hallow. Perhaps if the towns people were asked outside of the meeting their thoughts on Luke and Lorelai’s relationship, they would have been supportive. However, since they were at the meeting when the issue was discussed, they adhered to affiliative constraints and more than likely did not select the best alternative in their decision making process. Thus, this clip of Gilmore Girls expresses how the group think can potentially lead to flawed decision making.

Relational Dialectics Theory :: American Beauty

Since "American Beauty" showcases a dysfunctional family, a plethora of dialectics are present. This clip, however, shows a family dynamic that reveals the tensions of a few dialectics. Although the movie achieves this better as a whole, this clip acknowledges that not all families can be as ideal as they would prefer.

The clip begins with Janie, the daughter, coming home late for dinner. Then Carolyn, the mother, reveals that Lester, the father, quit his job. This launches an argument between the couple. Carolyn is upset because Lester should not be proud to lose a salary of $60, 000; Lester, however, is tired of going through the motions of life and prefers happiness to the tedium of a career in advertising.

Considering an ideal and normal family dinner (that subscribes to the constraints of American culture), this family is, in comparison, irritable and turbulent. Thus, the real vs. ideal dialect is represented. This juxtaposition is especially evident when Lester throws the plate of asparagus against the wall. Also, as opposed to couples making executive decisions about finances together, Lester shows another way that real families might act by quitting his job. This reveals a certain level of totality, or interdependence that is present in their relationship.

Another dialectic that can be seen is the public vs. private dialectic. Prior to this scene, the couple attends a dinner party where Lester acts conspicuously happy to be with his wife. Compared to this scene, though, it is clear that their private life is a contradiction to their public life. Public expectations have an effect on public status; therefore, the existence of this dichotomy is necessary to achieve a more personal relationship. Contextually, though, this particular scene rouses negative thoughts about the family’s private life.

Relational dialectics theory is based on the assumption that contradictions are ever-present in relational life. Lester and Carolyn are like physical representations of some of these contradictions, because the characters themselves contradict each other. Another assumption is that communication is inextricably linked to the search for a happy medium between these contradictions. The family as a whole lacks proper communication skills, and therefore their contradictions and actions are problematic. This family also represents the non-linear aspect of relational dialectics theory, which is a fundamental assumption claiming that not all relationships follow the same routine.

Throughout the movie they choose to use selection, which is exemplified by their independently made choices. Perhaps the family would not clash as much if they found compromised or used integration to solve their private problems. In trying to combine their contradictions, they might be able to come closer to the perceived ideal family.

Relational Dialectics Theory- "I love you...thank you."

An example of the Relational Dialectics Theory is seen in the television show, the OC. The clip begins with the two main characters, Ryan and Marissa, who are about to bring in the New Year together. The couple has experienced tough times from Marissa's struggle with alcohol abuse to Ryan's adaptation from city slum to wealthy suburbia. The two are excited to spend New Year's Eve together, but both have conflicting plans.
The assumption that contradiction is the fundamental fact of relational life is prevalent when Marissa states that she wants to attend a party; where as, Ryan would much rather "take it easy," and simply stay home enjoying one another's company. These conflicting views are not strong enough to ruin the relationship, but communication is necessary to negotiate and reach a compromise. Ryan reminds Marissa about the past Christmas when she was drunk and didn't remember the event; their relationship is characterized by change and reached the level where Ryan only wants the best for her. Ryan explained that his reason for wanting to stay home was because he wants to know that she will be safe. Marissa felt close to Ryan by his remark which then drove her to say I love you.
The basic relational dialectics: autonomy vs. connection and openness vs. protection were represented in the clip. Both characters were caught off guard when Marissa "slipped" by saying she loved Ryan. Ryan was taken aback by the comment and simply said, "thank you."
Ryan had his guard up and was not ready to say I love you back. Marissa felt connected to Ryan in response to him saying he wanted her to be safe and to be with him. She also was embarrassed for blurting out her feelings, and the fact that Ryan did not respond with the same affection made her feel humiliated. Marissa responded your welcome to his thank you and the couples' departure was awkward.
The OC clip represents contradiction and different views on love in that point in time of their relationship. Both care about one another yet the conflicting openness vs. protection aspect of their relationship is still a barrier for the couple to overcome.

Stable Exchange Stage of the Social Penetration Theory

In the above clip, one of the closing scenes of Zach Braff's lauded romantic indie flick "Garden State," the two main characters Andrew (Zach Braff) and Sam (Natalie Portman) finally approach the stable exchange stage of their relationship which has been built up over the course of the movie.

Throughout the movie Braff's character displays an inability to show emotion. He never cries, he is stoic in almost every social exchange he is involved in, and he fails to cry or even appear saddened by the death of his mother early on in the story. His jaded disposition isn't helped by the enormous dosages of lithium and other psychoactive drugs he consumes daily per the advice of his psychiatrist father.

In this scene, Andrew shows his first signs of vulnerability and complete openness to Sam when he sheds a tear. He also begins to talk about his history with his mother, a topic he avoids discussing at all until this point. Earlier in the movie, we learn from a slightly intoxicated Andrew that he pushed his mother when he was 9 years old, and through a series of freak occurrences, the fall left her confined to a wheelchair for the rest of her life. Because of this, he has resented her for most of his life, so this if the first time he expressed any positive attitudes towards her by sharing a pleasant memory from his childhood with Sam, representing full self-disclosure.

The couple displays synchronized needs in this scene as well. The minute Andrew sheds a tear Sam grabs a cup to "save it," and through this playful display she shows to Andrew that she understands how important this moment is.

Their conversation is no longer about trivial things like bands or pets as they were in the Orientation Stage. They are spontaneously and freely discussing issues with serious emotional weight, like Andrew's relationship with his deceased mother and their inability to cope with the fact they are in love even though they will soon be separated when Andrew returns to Los Angeles. The depth of their self-disclosure is at its greatest point.

Sam is equally open, when she begins to speak about how "it hurts..." referring to the fact that she cannot deal with Andrew's departure. This is also her highest point of self-disclosure as through the entire movie she has shown herself to be independent and free-spirited, not the type to fall in love easily. She shows her vulnerability as much, if not more, than Andrew does.

The two also seem to have achieved dyadic uniqueness as Sam and Andrew remain humorous throughout this emotionally-charged exchange. Andrew remarks he would save the first tear he has shed since childhood in a "scrapbook, if he had a scrapbook," while Sam half-jokingly says "I don't think I'm going to be able to get all of those," referring to his tears, when Andrew finally breaks down.

Throughout "Garden State" Andrew and Sam remain lover's at arms length, slowly growing closer throughout the Orientation, Exploratory Affective Exchange and Affective Exchange stages. While this is not the immediate moment they confirm their romantic attraction towards each other, this scene illustrates their full self-disclosure, spontaneity and dyadic uniqueness the best, so it is a vaild representation of the Stable Exchange stage of Social Penetration Theory.

The Orientation Stage of the Social Penetration Theory

The movie 50 First Dates is an exemplary film for the Social Penetration Theory.  In this movie, Drew Barrymore’s character suffers from short-term memory loss from a previous car accident.  Adam Sandler meets Barrymore at a small breakfast diner, and tries to pursue her.  When he finds out about Barrymore’s condition, he attempts to get her attention every morning at the diner using many diverse tactics.  In this particular clip, we see Sandler using superficial communication to get Barrymore’s attention.  He pretends that he cannot read the menu in order to get help from Barrymore.  Barrymore does help him through his “reading problem” by sounding out the word.  Even though the conversation is superficial, Barrymore is still very supportive and she never judges Sandler.  The characters do not learn any facts about each other, but they do communicate on a public level. This level of interaction is clearly the orientation stage of the Theory.  The only dysfunction to this stage is the unorthodox behavior of Sandler.  Usually communication at the orientation stage follows the norms of society, but Sandler chooses an obnoxious strategy to gain attention.  Although this clip strays slightly from the true meaning of the orientation stage of the Social Penetration Theory, the overall message is still the same.  Barrymore and Sandler do not self-disclose with each other, and they act at the outer, or public, layer of the onion analogy.  In this clip, they have no breadth or depth to their conversation, which solidifies the fact that they are still in the orientation stage.  

Social Penetration Theory

The social penetration theory is displayed in many scenes of the movie, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. In this film, Jim Carey is undergoing a procedure that erases his memories of his failed relationship with Kate Winslet. During the procedure, Carey’s character decides he does not want this to happen and desperately tries to hold on to these memories. This is a scene, where the social penetration theory is the most evident. It takes place inside Jim’s mind and Carey and Winslet’s characters are lying in bed together. Kate begins to tell Jim a story about when she was little and had a doll she thought was ugly. This is showing a great deal of intimacy, because she relates this doll to herself. She then asks Jim not to ever leave her. Jim responds by telling Kate that she is pretty. By telling this story, Kate feels close enough with Jim to express self-disclosure. Kate’s story shows great depth, because she is reaching back to her childhood. The couple is quite obviously in the stable exchange stage, because there is complete openness and spontaneity between the partners.
The next part of this clip shows Jim Carey and Kate Winslet’s characters lying on ice holding hands. Carey states, “I could die right now, Clem….I’m just happy. I’ve never felt that way before. I’m just exactly where I want to be.” This shows Carey’s reciprocity of Winslet’s feelings and also displays the stable exchange stage. By saying he could die shows that he has learned to love and feels that his life is complete. Each of these characters has let their guard down and have reached a very high level of intimacy. The scene ends with Carey reluctantly losing the memory. He wants to continue to feel that level of intimacy. Both characters are extremely vulnerable with one another and thus have clearly demonstrated the social penetration theory.