Catfish with many controversial ideas

Morgan Spurlock, director and subject of the documentary Super Size me, walked up to the producers of the film during one of its initial screenings and told them “it was the best fake documentary I had ever seen.” It is true that the film Catfish has some problems in authenticity. During the film making process, it showed some suspicious factors. People have also questioned the trio's decision to begin filming, as well as the seemingly improbable coincidence of them catching everything of importance to the story on film as it happens. It has also been pointed out that the group's supposed movements in Catfish are not documented in their public blog postings at the time and that at least one web site mentioned in the internet conversations shown in the film does not exist.

Not only that, it was suspicious that they did not use web-cam to find who she is. Isn’t it unclear that Nev did not use web-cam who is a professional in dealing computers and internet tools?

Like Morgan Spurlock said, the film Catfish is hard to be believed as a real documentary. The possibility that this documentary has been faked – or semi-faked or restaged exists. However, be free from the authenticity, viewers should concentrate on the lessons of the film. Whether it is a fiction or not is not an important question. Even if it were presented as fiction, it would still be fascinating. It is alarming us the possible dangers of social network system and internet life.

In the film, communication technology and other networking system assists and obstructs the movies in different aspects. In Catfish, there is full of design touches taken from the web. For example, Google Maps and Google Earth show the leading figures with respective locations in New York and Michigan where Angela lives. As we have seen through the catfish, Google tools allow us to zoom up and observe things and figure out what it is. These techniques theoretically make Abby and her family vividly and instantly real even though Michigan is far away from New York. However, because an elaborate visually detailed reality can so easily be conjured up via the web, it is so treacherous also.

The most important thing through the overall film is talking about relationships. SNS(social network system), especially Facebook allows us to keep in touch with many people. Users have many friends and many relationships. However, how many real friends with real relationships they have? In addition, can we believe the images and pictures they have posted on their walls? This is the creepy side of the Facebook. We cannot blame that posting fake pictures on their walls as wrong doing, but in the aspects of viewer, they have to differentiate the real and fake on the Facebook walls. The social network imagined the genesis of Facebook as a painful breakup experienced by its inventor, Mark Zuckerberg and shrewdly suggested that its popularity lies in allowing its users to regulate their contact with other people, to present and manipulate and image of themselves in ways previously available only to celebrities. This is the creepy side of Facebook and websites in general, amplified in catfish.

The real relationships cannot be attained in Facebook. It suggests only faked image and only On-line connections like move Matrix depicted. I don't think Catfish is a fake: the hidden story is all too plausible. But I do get the sense that Nev and the directors suspected or maybe even discovered the exact truth far earlier than they are letting on here

3 debate topics after the Catfish

1.     THB the film making process of Catfish violated Angela’s privacy.

2.     THB the Catfish should be treated as fiction.

3.     THB the real-name internet system should be adjusted to the website.

Appendix

 http://www.iamrogue.com/catfish (Official site of Catfish)

 Ebert, Roger."Catfish" Chicago Sun-Times, 22 September 2010

  

Sexual equality

 Breaking gender discrimination is not an easy work. Johanna Blakely explains us about social media and end of gender. However, Her statement covers only little part of gender problems. Before we argue about communication between genders, we have to know what factors have been constructed social gender role in our society. In other words, we have to start from origin which made fixed ideas of gender.

 Let’s see the case of Korea with chronological order.

1.     Confucian ideas and oppressive measure to women

 Traditionally, Korea was the nation which dominated by Confucianism. In Confucian ideas, there are many phrases that elevate the social hierarchy of men. Relatively, the social level of women became low. This is because Confucian ideas highlighted the loyalty and filial piety which naturally brought and enforced women’s absolute obedience to men.

 Through these ideas, Korea maintained the perfect patriarchal system for nearly 400 years. Not only Korea, but also other nations in the world maintained strong patriarchal system for long time. They did not have recognitions about protecting women rights.

2.     The time of flowering. (1910~1960)

 In fact, actual modernized era of Korea is from 1910 to 1930s, but for convenience I included other parts. In this era, with the inflow of the western civilization to Korea, the gender structure slightly changed with the appearance of “modern girl.” The word “modern girl” represents women who have lots of professional knowledge and struggle to protect their rights. Maybe we can call them as the first feminist.

 The appearance of “modern girl” was able because of inflow of western education system. Before the time of flowering, the women education was impossible. However, with the western education system, in Korea many modernized schools were established and women were also able to learn.

 The educated women changed the conventional ideas that society had. They deny the conventional gender roles and also wanted to work and have equal rights with men. Although their first struggle to society was deteriorated by vested male, it shows the start of breaking gender role.

3.     Age of Feminism and Ministry of gender equality.

 In recent years, many people’s idea about gender changed. The fixed ideas about gender roles also changed. There are a lot of reasons which can explain this phenomenon. But let’s focus on social media that Johanna Blakely introduced.

 With activated social media system, women were able to argue their ideas through social media easily. And with their thoughts of idea, they can expand it with active demonstrations. Also, in these days, consumerism becomes the biggest issue in the world. Many markets and firms work to satisfy consumers. Since women take large proportion of consumer, the social level women takes also elevated.

 Johanna Blakely, however, thought this fluctuation is still deficient for strengthening women rights. Although women actively participate in social network system and markets, it is a virtual image of markets and social media still dominated by male. Johanna Blakely also argued that these programs are not giving women equal rights but they are just attracting women to purchase goods and services.

 However, Johanna Blakely’s idea is too pessimistic. She underestimated the power of social media.

Social media allowed women to dominate the public opinion. Now, women not only hold great proportion of consumer, but also they are opinion leaders in social media. Especially, in Korea the Ministry of gender equality also established. (Although we know it as Ministry of women, the official name of it is Ministry of gender equality.)

4.     Reverse sexual discrimination.

 Like Johanna Blakely, we have thought women rights first. So far, we always thought social weak as women. However, now we have to reconsider the “gender equity.”

 We still have sensitive gender problems. The rewarding points for serving army service, hiring quota for women in public officers, and wage discrimination are problems that we have to solve. Because the Ministry of gender equality works as the Ministry of women, in policy making, there are possibilities that men rights can be ignored.

 It is dangerous to have biased idea. Now we have to think objective and make true equality between genders.

 Debate topics.

 THB additional points should be given to men who served for army service in Korea.

 THB the women hiring quota in public officers test should be banned.
 THB the Ministry of gender equality should be abolished.

Debate note.

 Note for impromptu debate.

 THB current jail system should be reformed and financially supported by government.

 [intro]
  Prison is needed for society's social stability
 It means prison should do not only prisoning criminals but also roles of rehabitation.

 but, in reality
  - suppressing.
  - not good.  > difficient money, support. Gov. support needed.

 + protecting prisoners' right.

  
[arguments]

 1) Environment problems.
  1. Physical
  Today : Jail modernized with facilities that helps living., (Prisoners right should be protected)
 but, problem is that the capacity of jails are limited.

 Prisoners are too many (outnumbered) : high density, clumped.
 possibility of hygienic problems and diseases. > It is not concerning the state of prisoners
 
  2. Psychological
  Nothing to do. (NO creative, productive action in jail) They just do simple things.(push up, sleeping.)
 - It is harmful for prisoners when we think about their outside life.
 we must give them a way for socialization to ensure that they will be able to live in common society.
 but. No work.

 Jail gives psychological emptiness to prisoners.

2) rehabitation is not effective
 Today in case of Korea, rehabitation is not well organized due to limited agents and government budge.
 Three categories that rehabitation programs are provided
  - drugs
  - metal disease
  - sexual violence

     No professionals, not enough information and knowledge. no remedy.
 As we've seen in the 30 days documentary, most of prisoners > return to jail in one or two month.
 continuance remedy X

 - To solve these problems. financial support and reform are needed.

Cruel English.

English Education.

1)     Importance of English.

 The minister of education in Korea highly emphasized English education. In addition, with the start of MB administration, the president Lee Myeong Bak also insisted that he will support English education. It is hard to deny that English is important language. These days, English is most powerful language and it is an also universal language.

 With the fast globalization, we now contact with many different countries cultures and people. To communicate with them, it is crucial for us to use English since it is used as common language. Also to adjust this globalization, many firms and business markets in Korea highly focus on English. When they hire employees, they want to see their TOEFL scores that verify the English abilities of worker.

2)     English as Barrier.

 I already mentioned in upper paragraph. These days, English is used as cutline. If a person who does not have enough English scores, he or she cannot get a job. As Patricia Ryan said, however, is it proper to make a barrier with English? I do not think so too.

 She gives us very interesting example.

Case in point, Einstein. He, by the way, was considered remedial at school because he was, in fact, dyslexic. But fortunately for the world, he did not have to pass an English test. Because they didn't start until 1964 with TOEFL, the American test of English.

However, these days require many English tests. If Einstein had to take English tests before he studies science, was he able to become a famous scientist as we now know? Now we are able to know, this barrier, English ability is restricting many intelligent professionals. It is great loss that we cannot be educated and learn from them because of English.

For using their knowledge their linguistic ability is unnecessary.

3)     English as a slaughterer

 Now the most important part is that inflow of English deters the development of domestic culture. We have to differentiate real globalization and Americanization. We are adopting not a diverse cultures but only English. With the cultures of English using countries. Can we then nominate this occurrence as “globalization”.

 When English enters to one nation, it does not come alone. In other words, it brings their culture and icons such as Coca cola, Mcdonalds. (that represents the English culture especially United States.) When it enters with other cultural aspect, nation’s own cultures cannot be maintained.

 There is no diversity with English dominated globalization. To make really globalized world, we have to cooperate and respect differences between cultures with tolerance. However, now a day, it shows the monopoly of English with devastates all of diversity.

 It may be important to have English as communication language. In addition, it is necessary for communication with other languages. However, although importance of English is significantly great, we do not have to change our language as English.

 The most important thing for us is maintaining our own cultures and languages. Without strong understand in our culture, it is hard to escape from monopoly of English.

 In the modernization era, Japanese reformer planned to change their mother tongue as English to make their country as developed country with faster adaptation of Western culture. However, many intellectuals such as professors and teachers of Japan objected.

 They insisted.

 “Japanese represents not only language but also Japan’s spirit.”

After 100 years have passed, now MB administration in Korea wants to make English as our common language. Why don’t we argue like Japan that they had insisted before 100years.

Foreign Workers' life

 Documentary 30 days.

 This Documentary’s aim is “tolerance toward difference”. Most of people are afraid about being differentiated and they also hate differences. They want to be “common people” which clarifies that they are in major group. In extreme case, they also taboo many different minorities. So the thing that this documentary plans to show us is tolerance toward minorities who have different life style and characteristics. In this documentary series there are some clips such as 30days life of Islam and straight Christian and Straight man live with gay people for 30days. At first the attendants in these clips felt uncomfortable toward differences but after they experienced about different cultures and different life style, they recognize that they should be tolerated toward different aspect, and different life style. Since it is their right and it should be respected also.

Another aim that this documentary wants to achieve is deep understand for underprivileged people’s life. For example there is a documentary for living 30 days with social minimum wage.

With this two big aims of documentary I suggest new documentary program which meets with this aim.

  30 days of foreign worker.

 [Motivation]

 These days there are many foreign workers. In case of Korea, there are many workers from India, China and even from Mongolia. Many of these workers comes Korea with “Korean Dream”. In reality, however, their working conditions are harsh. Also the owners of factories who hired foreign workers do not give them exact wage for their working.

 Some of their owners use violence. They beat foreign workers and use abusive language toward them. In addition, foreign workers do not have freedom of moving. In extreme case, foreign workers should be in designated place. When they were exposed during escape, they will be imprisoned.

 Not only harsh working conditions but also there are other suffering.

Some of radical Koreans think that these foreign workers are making Koreans hard to find jobs. Also they suppress foreign workers and ignore them.

 Furthermore most of foreign workers do not have proper qualification for entrance to Korea. In other words most of them are illegal emigrants. So they cannot have some legal protection in Korea, such as medical care and the basic legal rights for labor.

 However, the biggest problem is that our society’s recognition toward foreign workers is feeble.

So to help this understanding, I programmed this documentary; 30days of foreign worker. 

 [Simple Scenario]

Scenario is simple. We have to find some candidates. If he or she is the factory owner who hires foreign workers, it may provide us perfect clip.

First of all, we have to disguise supporter like foreign workers and let him work in factories.

For 30 days he lives with other foreign workers and experiences their hardships.

 [Expectation]

Maybe before attendant experiences the harsh conditions, he or she might think foreign workers as job robbers. However, after he or she experiences the harsh conditions and sufferings for foreign workers, they would change their thoughts about foreign workers.

The biggest origin of most social problems is social unconcern. Also the biggest problem of foreign workers is that society’s unconcern. Many of the Korean citizens do not know about. To cure the problems of foreign workers, we first have to make Koreans to concern about the problem.

After we get social concern, we are able to improve foreign workers’ condition. Maybe we can make a campaign for them, or we can claim that government should make proper legal right for foreign workers.  

This documentary will be the first shot for the movement.

Education & Creativity.

  In Korea, there is a word that expresses the power of education. “Cow bones tower.” When Korea started the modernization, many people were still farmers. However, farmers noticed that in modernization, they can escape from poverty by educating their children. So many farmers strongly supported the education for their children with hopeful expect toward them. And to earn money for them, they sell their lands and cows.

(For Korean farmers, cow was the essential estate for either agriculture or commerce.)

 Writer expressed this situation like this. “Today’s students are studying on the tower of cow bones that was killed for their tuition fee.”  This is the origin of the word “Cow bones tower.”

 But, why farmers supported them by selling their most important estate? In my opinion, it is because of the power of education that can move the social hierarchy. In the modernization era, with the higher education they can have certain jobs 100%. Also it allowed them to escape from poverty they had experienced through harsh agricultural condition. With this expectation, old farmers of Korea ventured their future to their children.

However, things have changed. Although, traditional education system had succeeded to nurture people who are needed to economic growth, these days require something different. 

In this essay, I will briefly organize the problems that current educational systems’ problems and how they kill creativity of students.

1.     Current Education system has no diversity.

 According to Mr. Ken’s lecture, creativity can be nurtured on the basis of diversity. In other words, there should be opened and wide variety of education for students. They should be able to learn many things. For example, they can learn dance, swim and literature without any concern. However, in reality, school system does not provide enough range of education for students. With limited number of teachers and capital, they cannot give students choices. Without the diversity of education, Students’ creativity cannot be expressed.

2.     Education system is focused on grading.

 GPA is not the most important thing. However, it is. In Korea, for the university entrance, the most powerful tool to appeal the ability of student is grade. So school system also focuses on “upgrading.” Many teachers in Korean high school force students to get better score than others. They have to study after the regular class courses. This is so called “야자.” (Additional classes after school) However, we cannot blame teachers it is not only the problem of schools but also educational system that makes students to focus on their grade. However, as Mr. Ken said, there are many ways that allow individual to develop. Maybe they can draw a picture, or plan a movie. However, in Korean society it is really hard to do that.

3.     Still. Many Koreans think that education is the only way for hierarchical change.

 We know that things have changed. We are not living in a modernization period. Still, however, many people think education is the best way for better life. There are famous jobs in Korea. Those are doctor, lawyer and professor. In Korean society these vocations are treated as privileged class. Many people want them or their children to have vested rights and earn more money. So it is not strange situation that many parents support their children to make them doctors, lawyers, and professors. To become these “privileged class” it is crucial to get a good grade in schools.

 This is the original reason that explains why Korean society’s education system is stagnated by the grade and loss of diversity.

And Finally -- How can we solve.

 The paradigm should be changed. Education is not a tool for entrance to the privileged class. Education should be recognized as an investment for future that helps us to improvise our talents. The original idea of parents should be changed also.

 They should recognize their children that they have some sort of creativity. Also they should effort to discover their children’s potential ability.  

Michael Moore's yellow press

Michael Moore

In 1960s, Korea, there were many struggles and demonstrations for democracy against general dictator. The revolt was mainly controlled by the university students. Some might say that this is the evidence that students can have a great role for better political environment. In addition, they might also claim that students’ great participation can change the society.

However, they should know that in the period of 1960s in Korea. University students were regarded as perfect adult, and they had authority in the aspects of academics so they were entirely different with these days’ university students.

So, their revolt should be seen as the revolt of “citizen” not the “students.” Most important thing is that today’s students cannot and should not do this works.

According to Michael Moore, however, he thinks students’ active participations are needed for better democracy and change of educational environment. Michael Moore argues that many students are suppressed by the school rule and the teacher. As a result students are not able to manifest their opinion clearly and loudly to the society.

I partly agree with the Moore’s opinion about students’ freedom. There should be enough freedom to students to talk about their school life to teachers and about school environment also. However, these kinds of freedom should be limited for students. It is really dangerous way to liberate students for the excess of political issues.

First of all, Michael Moore should recognize that young children are “students.” They are in the state of learner. In other words, they do not have enough knowledge about their right yet. So giving students a great right (publish all of their idea through the newspaper) can be ill-used by them. Many of the students concern are focused on their school life, environment and gossip things. They hardly understand what fundamental problem is. They rarely understand about whole educational system. So, although Michael Moore opened his website to take free opinions of students, there might be no useful ideas that can be used to cure fundamental problems.

Secondly, Moore’s idea can be dangerous in different way. Moore’s activity for students can be interpreted as students’ political participation. Students, however, should not be allowed to do that.

It is obvious that political issues are very controversy. So when we talk about controversial issue, we should prevent it from sensationalistic movement and populism that can disturb rational decision. However, students are vulnerable to these kinds of sensationalism and populism.

For example, there is a Teachers’ Union in Korea. ( So called “전교조” Gyutae mentioned it earlier in his essay.) When they first came out, they were union that protected teachers and students right against authority. However, now some of them deteriorated like political organization. To spread their power all over the country, they incite the students with attractive issues such as abolition of exam. Which are not able to be realized.

 Their sensationalistic way allured students to behave like anti-school. Students can be easily biased. With this sensationalistic way, most students will be allured and support them without specific reason but by their emotional motive only. So it is quite dangerous to open them a way to access for political issues.

 There is possibility that they can be exploited by other political organization. To protect them from these dangers, Moore’s program should be limited in expanding students’ rights in school environment only.

Giving students a right for political participation is too radical decision.

In Korea, also, now it is different with 1960s. Our society became more structured and well organized. In addition, our educational environment also developed. Usually, many teachers and schools protect students’ rights.

In this situation, it is quite unnecessary to make students act against to their schools. There are no reasons and necessity for Korean students to revolt.

 Here are my debate motions.

 THB Michael Moore’s activity (newspaper) should be regulated.

 THB educational methods(teachers, organizations) must be separated with  political issue.

  (Education should be free from political issue.)

 THB students political participation should be limited.

After the documentary

The <Story of Stuff>

  After watching the <Story of Stuff>, many viewers might have thought about the pollution, and the problematic causes of manufacturing.

According to the documentary, many commodities that we use are the result of the toxic manufacturing which used to contaminate the whole environment. The creator of the animation also supported her idea with various statistics. At first glance, her idea was viewed as really convincing. However, this documentary has two main problems for its credibility. Documentary’s statistics and opinions are not really convincing.

  First of all when we use statistics, it is crucial to verify the standard of the statistics or the survey. For example in the animation, there is a part that creator claims that ‘about 40% of the original forest have destroyed’. Although it seems quite ‘correct’ statistics, however, it does not verify what ‘original’ really means. Original can be interpreted differently. Someone can understand the original forest as before the industrialization, and other might understand it as the pre-historian era. Like this when using a statistic as a supportive material it is crucial to maintain the critical standard. Also, there is another factor that can bring error to the statistics. We have to know that most statistics are based on survey. During the survey, they make a sample for the survey. (Usually the sample for the survey is the group of people) The problem is that when the sample for survey is inclined to extreme direction, (For example, survey for approval rating in the region that most of people are conservationist.) the outcome cannot be used as actual represent. Furthermore, it can be very dangerous to use as a supportive material.

  These things are called as errors of survey. The documentary that we had seen was highly connected with these errors when it used statistics. So it is hard to believe the whole things in this documentary.

  Secondly, the teacher in the documentary is too aggressive for her opinion. We have to consider that this material is for education not for sensationalism. For education, the most important purpose should be delivering information that is not biased. However, lecturer in the animation held her opinion too strongly. She blamed the government as a pet of firm, and always had a negative position toward manufacturing. In fact, however, there are many positive aspects in government, and manufacturing also. The learners, students have to know what is positive and what is negative. Both of them are required to nurture student with unbiased basement for their knowledge. Without this effort, they will have only biased information. This is not the correct role for documentary, and for education. It is true that <Story of Stuff> has some difficulties in delivering their opinions. However, we have to point out the important fact from it. What I'm trying to say here is the shocking things the shocking video told us about are hardly believable. Furthermore it is true that there are many exaggerations. But, the ability which is needed for us is not rejecting it but, filtering. In other words we have to differentiate what is the reality and what is the exaggeration. Sadly, most of the media does not give us ‘always truth’ news.

 To avoid from sensationalism, and hardly believable errors of statistics, it is crucial to nurture the ability for differentiate what is fact and what is not.

 And here are my topics for debate.

THB strong regulations are needed for manufacturing.

THB teachers should educate the knowledge without their opinions.

THB historical analysis should avoid the opinion of historians themselves and only depends on the fact itself.