gift registry- cards a no no, invitations all electronic- evite
coffee? no, busy, just email me a copy
A new aspect of technology has been brought to my attention lately, and I have to say, it is becoming a personal pet peeve. How technology is interfering with my girl time these days is annoying, and the new ways to plan a GNO are getting to be way more complicated than it should be. Trying to plan a girls night out consists of every form of technology we have these days. You text to find a date that works, then call to see a time that's best, then email a reminder for the flaky friends. It gets exhausting! I miss the days where we just called each other and set a date and time, and everyone would show up because we all wrote it down in our day timers. Those days are long gone.
I am starting to plan my baby shower, and invitations are my next thing on my list. I have all of my friends phone numbers, I have the majority of my friends email addresses, but I was surprised by how few recent home addresses I have for my friends. My mother and I were sitting down with my best friend who is helping with he shower, and we were talking about the best way to get the addresses. My friend mentioned that the email addresses we don't have we can most likely find on Facebook, so why don't we just look there and send out Evites instead. My mother had no idea what she was talking about.
It took us a few minutes to explain the Evite system, and we tried to pump it up as much as possible focusing on the convenience factors, and how you can RSVP right online and how the responses get sent directly back to you- but no chance. My mother thought that an email for an invitation was completely inappropriate and that the member of our family would not only think it was a tacky gesture, but that the majority of them would be flat out offended by it.
I have to stop and assume that the difference in opinion is strictly generational, and has a lot to do with the fact that my mother does not even have an email account. She does not get the convenience, because she has never experienced it. My mother's friends are the type of gals who send elaborate invitations to every event- form a Superbowl party to a BBQ, you get a 3D invite in the mail, addressed in calligraphy. The idea to send an electronic invitation was way beyond her realm of thinking.
A baby shower is up there with a wedding in my opinion, as far as invitations go. I have received Evites for informal events, such a s BBQ's or sorority alumni events, but never for a wedding or baby shower-- yet.
Apparently the up and coming trend is Wedding Evites. Ashlee Simpson was the first to attempt the fad, and things did not go well in Hollywood. Critics called her "Trashlee Simpson" and claimed that her Alice in Wonderland theme was completely turned tacky thanks to her email invitation attempt. Had she sent "real" invitations with elaborate ribbon or paper, the event would have been perceived differently.
As with text messages, a message can get lost in translation or be taken completely different than meant. Evites are the same way. The wrong impression can be given by the wrong invitation, and Evites have been labeled as improper for formal affairs and impersonal for intimate events.
Another problem with Evites is receiving them. It is hard to miss a huge, odd shaped envelope mixed in with bank statements in your mail, but to skip over an email that claims, "You're invited!" can be easy to do. In this day and age, we all have so many accounts that we do our business with, how do we know at the end of the day who we have given what address to? There are very few accounts of my own that I check regularly, and I have to admit, I have missed a few last minute BBQ's because of it.
So this is where the etiquette question comes in. What is considered an appropriate affair to send an Evite for? And if you do send an Evite, what is the method of contact for those who do not have an email address? For example, with my baby shower, if I do choose (which at this point is NOT an option) to send Evites out, then do I send regular invitations to my grandmother and older relatives that might not be as technologically savvy as my college aged friends? And as long as I am doing invitations, do I send them to the people I sent Evites to as well? Or do I sen Evites and call the others? I can't imagine calling a relative to invite them to my baby shower. Where is the line drawn between Evite Acceptable and Evite Inappropriate? And what order is technology in these days from formal to informal? Would we say formal invitation, telephone call, Evite, then text? What is appropriate for what? Does the age of the recipient matter? What about the location? Do we trust technology enough to deliver such an important message like a wedding or baby shower invitation?
It is said that there is something invaluable about having a tangible invitation, hand-written, and specifically addressed to you, that no other form of technology can replace. I agree with that. Anything handwritten these days is precious to me, and I try my hardest to hand write as many cards and letters as I can, but it is a challenge knowing how much faster a letter can be produced on a computer, and how much more quickly it can be delivered. Have our values changed concerning time and thought in a gift? Do we value getting a message to the recipient quicker, more than the thought behind the message being sent? What drives us to be "pressed for time" or rushed in sending anything at all?
Since I have taken this course and analyzed technology from an entirely different standpoint, I have realized how little I communicate face-to-face, and how much more I value time spent with someone as apposed to with their profile.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Celebrities and their Cell Phones
Although we are aware that our personal relationships are being affected by technology, do you ever stop to think if celebrities lives are affected as well? We always think of being interrupted by a text, or a reminder, but have the boundaries of technology and day to day life for celebrities changed as well? From Miley Cyrus to President Obama, priorities have changed.
One of the biggest changes that has been made in the White House with this Presidency is the fact that President Obama has managed to keep hold of his Blackberry device. There was much fuss made over the security measures that will have to be taken if President Obama insists on keeping his Blackberry, one security measure being an encryption software installed as to keep the "bad guys" out of private conversations. (LATimes.com)
President Obama has always been "virtually connected" to supporters, which has been made clear through his Facebook page, online fundraising, and YouTube videos. The thought of not being able to keep his Blacknberry which he has used to make all of these things assessable to him, would be hard to swallow. Imagine if someone told you that you could not use your phone anymore, and that it was being taken away from you for security measures- How would you react?
President Obama does get to keep his phone after much ado, and I have to admit that it is nice to know that our President knows how to use his Blackberry and relies on it as much as I rely on mine.
Miley Cyrus, being a typical teen with their phone attached to their hand, was caught texting during a live interview on the radio. Being a little caught off guard, the host asked, "Who are you texting?" which led into a terrible interview consisting of awkward silences. Isn't that crossing the line just a little bit? To me, texting while having a conversation is considered rude and flat out annoying, but while a celebrity is being interviewed? Give me a break.
I am studying to become a journalist, and I have no idea what I would do if I was interviewing Hannah Montana and she picked up her phone and started texting in the middle of it! I mean, I guess she can do whatever she wants being number 12 on the Holloywood's Top 20 Young, Famous, and Rich list, but don't they teach some sort of manners in the Disney family?
Along with well known celebrities increasing their phone time, designer Jason Wu, who is responsible for Michelle Obama's Inaugural Ball Gown (the gorgeous one-shoulder white one) said that he received hundreds of text messages in the following week with clients begging for designs. He said the night of the Ball, he had to turn off his phone because the ringing was too much to handle, and just take in the surprise that Michelle was wearing his dress on his own.
Who would have text the newest, hottest designer five years ago to ask for an appointment or a design? No one. Times have changed and so have relationships between celebrities and their phones, and celebrities and their fans.
Along with cell phones, celebrities have found a new found love for Twittering. Ashton Kutcher has made headlines by declaring that he will get more followers than CNN (which he did) and Shaq has daily followers that meet him random places he designates on his Twitter for free basketball tickets. Celebrities have found an easy, safe way to access their fans on a one-on-one level, without it being one-on-one.
Having a way to contact your favorite celebrity, whether it be by text or Twitter, makes a fan feel connected, which inevitably creates a sense of loyalty and comrodery. Twitter accounts are being used from college professors to Sean Puffy Combs, which shows the versatility of the site and the potential for outreach.
Along with relating to fans, celebrities have been introduced more and more to the power of product placement. No longer do celebrities have to talk to us on the TV screen and build a reputation so that we trust their opinion, all they have to do is hold a particular water bottle or telephone in a scene now and sales sky rocket.
The trend started in the early 2000, beginning to increase, where marketers shelled out 71% more — $941 million — to integrate brands into TV shows in 2005 vs. 2004 (PQ Media, USAToday.com).
The growing trend of product placement is everywhere from late night talk shows, to full feature films, from reality TV, to soap operas. And it doesn't stop there. A Finnish author, Steig Larsson, has received slashing on discussion boards for his product placements within his books. Readers complain about how every computer piece and mobile phone in all three books are described in detail, and how the brand is always mentioned. Why should this matter to the reader? What purpose does this information serve if not merely for product placement?
America's Next Top Model is, in my opinion, the worst product placement program. Everything they use, from make up to toilet paper, they fully endorse and use a catch phrase for. They incorporate activities solely for the purpose to advertise a specific product, and you feel like you are watching an hour long advertisement on the home shopping network, with a few dramatic scenes added for entertainment value.
I have worked as a spokes model for the majority of the past four years, and recently I have noticed the trend of product placement as well. Instead of product information about the bottled water or pricey watch company I was representing, I have been given the movies that the product made an appearance in and what actors are wearing it these days. For example, one of the main points I was supposed to get across to the Las Vegas Convention in 2008, was that a Tutima watch was used in the Robert Deniro and Al Pacino film, Righteous Kill. It was the watch that they use to time each other the whole movie. When I worked Sundance Film Festival this year, I was working for Icelandic Glacial bottled water. One of our main points to the public was the appearances the water has made on the TV series Scrubs and the future films that are considering it.
Does a celebrity opinion mean less to us now? Do we only need to see the product to want to buy it? Is there no trusting relationship built between client and spokes model anymore? Does this mean less endorsement deals in the future for celebrities? Only time will tell...
One of the biggest changes that has been made in the White House with this Presidency is the fact that President Obama has managed to keep hold of his Blackberry device. There was much fuss made over the security measures that will have to be taken if President Obama insists on keeping his Blackberry, one security measure being an encryption software installed as to keep the "bad guys" out of private conversations. (LATimes.com)
President Obama has always been "virtually connected" to supporters, which has been made clear through his Facebook page, online fundraising, and YouTube videos. The thought of not being able to keep his Blacknberry which he has used to make all of these things assessable to him, would be hard to swallow. Imagine if someone told you that you could not use your phone anymore, and that it was being taken away from you for security measures- How would you react?
President Obama does get to keep his phone after much ado, and I have to admit that it is nice to know that our President knows how to use his Blackberry and relies on it as much as I rely on mine.
Miley Cyrus, being a typical teen with their phone attached to their hand, was caught texting during a live interview on the radio. Being a little caught off guard, the host asked, "Who are you texting?" which led into a terrible interview consisting of awkward silences. Isn't that crossing the line just a little bit? To me, texting while having a conversation is considered rude and flat out annoying, but while a celebrity is being interviewed? Give me a break.
I am studying to become a journalist, and I have no idea what I would do if I was interviewing Hannah Montana and she picked up her phone and started texting in the middle of it! I mean, I guess she can do whatever she wants being number 12 on the Holloywood's Top 20 Young, Famous, and Rich list, but don't they teach some sort of manners in the Disney family?
Along with well known celebrities increasing their phone time, designer Jason Wu, who is responsible for Michelle Obama's Inaugural Ball Gown (the gorgeous one-shoulder white one) said that he received hundreds of text messages in the following week with clients begging for designs. He said the night of the Ball, he had to turn off his phone because the ringing was too much to handle, and just take in the surprise that Michelle was wearing his dress on his own.
Who would have text the newest, hottest designer five years ago to ask for an appointment or a design? No one. Times have changed and so have relationships between celebrities and their phones, and celebrities and their fans.
Along with cell phones, celebrities have found a new found love for Twittering. Ashton Kutcher has made headlines by declaring that he will get more followers than CNN (which he did) and Shaq has daily followers that meet him random places he designates on his Twitter for free basketball tickets. Celebrities have found an easy, safe way to access their fans on a one-on-one level, without it being one-on-one.
Having a way to contact your favorite celebrity, whether it be by text or Twitter, makes a fan feel connected, which inevitably creates a sense of loyalty and comrodery. Twitter accounts are being used from college professors to Sean Puffy Combs, which shows the versatility of the site and the potential for outreach.
Along with relating to fans, celebrities have been introduced more and more to the power of product placement. No longer do celebrities have to talk to us on the TV screen and build a reputation so that we trust their opinion, all they have to do is hold a particular water bottle or telephone in a scene now and sales sky rocket.
The trend started in the early 2000, beginning to increase, where marketers shelled out 71% more — $941 million — to integrate brands into TV shows in 2005 vs. 2004 (PQ Media, USAToday.com).
The growing trend of product placement is everywhere from late night talk shows, to full feature films, from reality TV, to soap operas. And it doesn't stop there. A Finnish author, Steig Larsson, has received slashing on discussion boards for his product placements within his books. Readers complain about how every computer piece and mobile phone in all three books are described in detail, and how the brand is always mentioned. Why should this matter to the reader? What purpose does this information serve if not merely for product placement?
America's Next Top Model is, in my opinion, the worst product placement program. Everything they use, from make up to toilet paper, they fully endorse and use a catch phrase for. They incorporate activities solely for the purpose to advertise a specific product, and you feel like you are watching an hour long advertisement on the home shopping network, with a few dramatic scenes added for entertainment value.
I have worked as a spokes model for the majority of the past four years, and recently I have noticed the trend of product placement as well. Instead of product information about the bottled water or pricey watch company I was representing, I have been given the movies that the product made an appearance in and what actors are wearing it these days. For example, one of the main points I was supposed to get across to the Las Vegas Convention in 2008, was that a Tutima watch was used in the Robert Deniro and Al Pacino film, Righteous Kill. It was the watch that they use to time each other the whole movie. When I worked Sundance Film Festival this year, I was working for Icelandic Glacial bottled water. One of our main points to the public was the appearances the water has made on the TV series Scrubs and the future films that are considering it.
Does a celebrity opinion mean less to us now? Do we only need to see the product to want to buy it? Is there no trusting relationship built between client and spokes model anymore? Does this mean less endorsement deals in the future for celebrities? Only time will tell...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
