Reading Assignment #6--Dalby's The World And Wikipedia pgs. 114-225

Good evening dear followers. So this week's assignment for my Technology & Culture In America class was to finish reading Andrew Dalby's book: The World And Wikipedia: How We Are Editing Reality. While I was finishing reading this rather dull book I must say I began to become focused on the main title more and more; "how we are editing reality". In my opinion we edit reality everyday; whether it be websites such as Wikipedia, magazine cover shots such as Elle or Cosmo, or reality tv program footage such as The Jersey Shore or The Housewives Of New Jersey.

In regards to website editing like Wikipedia I found an interesting article online. Back in August of 2006 Stephen Colbert on an episode of The Colbert Report, "praised Wikipedia for "wikiality," the reality that exists if you make something up and enough people agree with you - it becomes reality" (newsvine.com). Colbert's subsequent examples to prove "wikiality" would cause chaos on the site, and lead an administrator to subsequently block his account. In his segment Colbert goes on to declare that he doesn't believe George Washington had slaves. "If I want to say he didn't that's my right, and now, thanks to Wikipedia *taps keyboard* it's also a fact"--says Stephen Colbert. By Colbert addressing this on his show I agree with him in the sense that he is saying people are too lazy to take the time to verify things, they just go with the first search engine hit that pops up. The point is that uncritical minds believe everything they read.

In regards to magazine advertising, it’s no surprise that advertisers, and marketers use the “art” of airbrushing photographs to alter what reality looks like and to convey a certain type of image. Covers of magazines show flawless actors, actresses, singers, and models. We’re all aware of this as consumers. We know these models don’t really look the way they are portrayed on the glossy pages, but for some reason we’re okay with it. We still go ahead and buy the products being advertised or the clothes being modeled. Then we get upset when the bathroom cabinet piles up with a collection of face washes that never really worked, cover –ups that advertise miracles and provide none and mascara that claims to never clump and does so after the first use. Still surprised that Vanessa Hudgens appears to have no zits as she advertises for Neutrogena’s skin clearing cleansers? Don’t be. Two words: Adobe Photoshop. This is how magazines edit reality.

One of the attractions of reality television is the supposed "reality" of it; unscripted and unplanned situations and reactions. One of the ethical problems of reality television is the fact that it isn't nearly as "real" as it pretends to be. At least in dramatic shows one can expect the audience to understand that what they see on the screen doesn't necessarily reflect the reality of the actors' lives; the same, however, cannot be said for heavily edited and contrived scenes on sees on reality shows. Why are we so intrigued by it; why do we have to watch? I suspect that people's ability and willingness to take pleasure in the suffering and humilitation of others may stem from the increasing separation we experience from others around us. The more distant we are from each other as individuals, the more readily we can objectify each other and fail to experience sympathy and empathy when others around us suffer. The fact that we are witnessing events not in front of us but rather on television, where everything is has an unreal and fictional air about it, probably aids in this process as well.

Whether it's Wikipedia, magazine covers, or reality tv shows--we edit reality everyday. Editing reality is a lot easier then you have been led to believe, anyone can do it, and that's the problem.