Monday, September 19, 2011

(2 Par. RE: ATT) Globalization & the Age of Information Technology (FINAL)


The commercial this post refers to can be found here.

In this ATT commercial, two children (presumably Hansel & Gretel) are portrayed walking down the street of an imaginary city created by ATT. Both children are young and their clothing style seems to be rather out of place in a city such as the one cast by ATT. They are alone, and appear to get lost. The city is portrayed to be more dangerous after they get lost, with a shot of the high rise buildings looming over the children, and a man closing down a shop with bars across the front. A few things should be noted here; (1) these children are quite obviously out of place, most likely from another country; (2) the [foreign] city they are travelling through is portrayed as dangerous, until they look at the GPS on their cell phone (implying that ATT saves the day).

This commercial implies that it is the technology, provided by ATT, that saves these children from ending up horribly lost. There are a couple of different ways this commercial fulfills its aim, namely to sell the idea of ATT to consumers. The first, and most obvious, is the play upon a mother’s fear of losing her child. This ensures that a mother will at least think twice before not buying her younger children cell phones. The second is through the representation of the children as the “loss of innocence” to technology. As more and more technology is reaching younger and younger audiences, one must question how it affects children such as the ones in the commercial. The younger children are when introduced to technology, the more dependent upon it they become. They don’t know another way of living, which is represented in the initial dropping of the bread crumbs to find their way back home. This “other” way of living is quickly dispelled, however, in the consumption of the bread crumbs. Although new technology such as this fuels the increasing globalization of people, less and less people actually know where they are without this technology. This increasing dependency upon technology ensures the continuation of companies such as ATT.

5 comments:

  1. Taylor, I like the point that you're trying to get at. :) However, I think there is too much summary in the first paragraph, and that you should expand on your idea and clarify what you're trying to say. I would split the last paragraph into two, one for each of the points you brought up in the first paragraph. I think that would make your argument more cohesive and organized.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would either lose the first paragraph completely or start introducing your second paragraph's concept in the first paragraph. Both have value, but they should be more cohesive.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I like how you summarize the commercial so well! However, the ATT should be changed to AT&T. The numbering system really works. The second paragraph seems separate from the first paragraph. Both were great, but together they don't match. I like the second paragraph more too because you seem to choose a side, while in the first paragraph you don't make an argument but just summarize. Your writing is great though! Keep it up!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Taken in pieces, this post is well-written and brings up many interesting facts. Too many points, perhaps. All together in this short work, they just seem disjunct. If you choose just one point to write about and elaborate upon it, the piece will have more meaning. Also, you tend to use the same word over and over throughout a paragraph. If you can find other words to substitute, it will be more interesting and appealing to the ear - especially words like commercial, AT&T, and children.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is a really great piece of writing. I wish I could write as coherently as you. I have a couple things I will recommend you do. First you should write more on the children being more out of place. If you don't want to do that you should get rid of the first paragraph entirely. Also you don't focus on the maternal instincts you mention in the first part of the second paragraph. If I were you, I would get rid of that paragraph completely.

    ReplyDelete