Interactive Oral Activity nr.2

Rationale

Our second Interactive Oral Activity was planned later this year. This time with a different subject, but with more experience. The subject social media applied to both of us.

We handled the preparation a little differently this time. However a day before the actual presentation, we changed our idea. We decided to do a webshow/vlog. We only had a short time, but we managed to make a video to our consent. The advantage of only having a video, is that we wouldn't have the problem of speaking in front of the group.

Because of the short time our vlog wasn't perfectly edited and a bit messy at some points. We did like the fact that it looked spontanious. We did think about the fact that we were being really informal, but supposed that would be alright because of our chosen medium. In the end though, it would have been much better if we'd thought out the order of things a bit better beforehand. So next time we have to come up with an idea sooner.

The main comment of the teacher was the division of the talking. I was a bit more in the background, but I think that's part of my character. My teacher called it modest, I like to go with that:)

Overall, as Sabine also recalls in her blog, our the cooperation was great as always , we never seem to have to worry about that. 

Growing up online

Today we watched a documentary about teenagers and their use of social media and the internet. After watching this tv program, I realized that young children who grow up now are used to having a computer at home.

Parents and grandparents always refer to the time when there were no computers or televisions at all. As a kid, I couldn't imagine people could only watch television, if they were lucky to have a neighbour with one in the living room. Nowadays, there are almost no households without television. Most households will have a computer or at least one laptop. The thing I remember clearly from the documentary is a mother who described her situation when the family came home. They would either be in their room, or all behind a laptop. She was worried about the amount of social time is spent behind the computer instead of real life contact. Personally, I think she has a good point on that. I think it's important to spent quality family time together and that's not possible if everybody is doing something on their own.

On the other hand, I would not blame social media sites like facebook. Another mother was strongly against this new type of media, which is very popular among teenagers. I think, and most of my classmates would agree, that she was overreacting. She checked everything her children did on the computer, what sites they had been on and even inform other parents when she found an indication of inappopriate behaviour. She thought that social media was a curse. Even though internet brings many dangers, like false identities, it has also brought us so many improvements. The social media sites are mostly used by teenagers in a way they can keep contact with their friends. Instead of a phone, which you have to pay for, internet has brought us cheaper ways of contacting: e-mail, facebook, twitter and instant messenger for example. Because children and young adults grew up with these kind of websites, we are aware of how to use them and what not to do. Young people often deal easier with difficulties on the computer than people who are 40 years or older. This is because that generation grew up in the time with no computer.

This brings us to another part of the documentary in which children in Asia were taught how to use a computer at a very young age. I do think it's important that children are aware of the dangers, but this was almost scary. Maybe the computer can take over a bit too much in our lives.

Internet may have its advantages and disadvantages. Think of the free access to information with the help of wikipedia and google. Teachers can make their lessons more modern, keeping the attention of the students, by using digital media. People can keep in touch with their friends with facebook and hotmail. Danger can be found everywhere, also on the internet, but as long as we are aware of this internet can make our lives so much easier. Older people may have more problems with this new kind of technology, but when you're growing up online you'll notice what a difference a computer can make.

The new provider of information: Wikipedia

Wikipedia is known all over the world. The website has been set up by Jimmy Wales. Its main goal is to provide free information to people over the world. The only thing needed is internet of course.

“Wikipedia does not give the truth. It gives objective information about a subject.” This is said by Jimmy Wales. The information is provided by volunteers and can be changed by others. The information is being controlled regurlarly on its reliability, so no subjective information can be found on the website. This makes the data fairly correct.

Although the information is being checked, there are still people who doubt the reliability of Wikipedia. This is because the website is controlled by volunteers, no experts. The articles can be changed by others, which gives less security. The danger of using Wikipedia is that also false information is leaked on the internet.

A big advantage of Wikipedia is that people have free excess to knowledge. Lots of data is hidden by important institutions such as the government. It gives people more freedom to be given information. The danger of this is that also secret data of a country can be made public, which might have negative consequences for its population.

Personally I think that there are more advantages than disadvantages. The amount of information provided is gigantic. Besides, using the internet makes it a lot easier and faster to find answers. This is because books are not necessary anymore. Instead of flipping through the pages, the computer does the searching for you. This saves a lot of time and effort. Even though Wikipedia is not always thrustworthy, it has many advantages and worth using.

Interactive Oral Activity nr.1

Rationale

Our first Interactive Oral Activity was planned on the 15^th of February. Based on the subject Media & Culture, we chose to talk about the invasion of privacy of celebrities.

Our main problem during preparation was the type of form. Eventually we decided to do an interview, with some elements of a talk show. Instead of having a conversation between two people, we made up three people: two being interviewed and one interviewer. This caused some problems in the amount of text and role division. It has been a good choice though, because now we showed two sides of the issue: the experiences of a celebrity and the experiences of a journalist. We divided the amount of text evenly by dividing the role of the interviewer.

Sabine and I have worked together before, so this was no problem at all. This has been our first presentation together though. To be more comfortable, we kept the written text with us during the presentation. Unfortunately this also caused reading out pieces of text and ended up to be our main point of criticism. Personally, I was bothered by the fact I could hear myself making mistakes while the content of the text was formed quite well.

I think the form of an interview suited us and our division of roles worked out pretty good. We doubted if it would get confusing, but it did not. I’m also satisfied with the content of our interview. Our collaboration worked out fine, but I didn’t expect problems because we’ve done projects together before.

We’re both not fond of standing in front of the class, so taking that in consideration the performance was okay. Next time we could try to use keywords, instead of the whole text.

Better life, No crime

Is this possible?

Safety, education and an expanded budget. It sounds like we’re able to live in an Utopia, if we will vote for Better life, no crime. But, are these goals even achievable with the measures they have?

“We are going to make America a lot safer by establishing a stricter immigration policy”  There is nothing wrong with this statement. We all want to live in a safe society. “They have to prove they deserve a place in our society”  Will people vote for you, if you use arguments like these? Our society is made up different people, different religions and different cultures. This is what makes America! There is no ‘perfect culture’ that every citizen should adapt. Everybody deserves a place in our society, they do not have to prove that by changing their lifestyle.

Talking about changing their lifestyle, better life no crime want people with an unhealthy lifestyle to pay more healthcare costs. How can you tell someone has an unacceptable lifestyle? Sure there are people having health problems because of a high fat percentage, but not every ill person in the hospital is lying there goes to McDonalds everyday for lunch! I don’t think you can force people to pay extra, because there is no clear example of an healthy lifestyle everybody should adapt.

At last they want to use the ‘expanded budget’ to put more police on the streets and improve education. Again, nice promises, but not reasonable. There is no chance, the budget will be expanded in such a way that government can subside schools and offices.

“We ask America to support us in order to have a better life”  Instead of supporting better life no crime, let’s find a party who supports us.

Response to Romeo and Juliet

Romeo meets Juliet for the first time at a costumed party at the Capulet’s house. Through the glass of the aquarium, he sees her face and falls in love immediately. A romantic song is played in the background. The nurse gets to Juliet and brings her to Paris. The character of Paris makes you think of a fool, who is too full of himself. The character of Juliet is casted really well. The girl looks sweet and innocent in her angel costume. After the dance of Paris and Juliet, the story becomes a bit hasty. Because of this, the story also becomes less romantic. It’s original story is placed in a modern setting, which I think is not a right combination.

In the performance we’ve seen, Romeo was casted more as a tough guy. He was not  a sweet, romantic boy like the Romeo from the book. However, this was not annoying at all. He did show a bit of arrogance.

I think that Juliet was very different than the original Juliet. The Juliet from Shakespeare’s “Romeo & Juliet” is kind, friendly, honest and innocent. The woman, who played Juliet in the Illyria performance was shouting (because there were no microphones used) but this made Juliet not sweet-hearted at all. Especially in the balcony scene, she looked angry instead of in love.

There were almost no props used in the performance. There was a “death bed” placed behind the curtain and there was some kind of “balcony”. The actors changed clothes, when they changed characters. This made the difference between characters clear for the audience. The acting was fine. Paris was casted as a bit of a loser and the father of Juliet was a very dominant man. The nurse was casted very good. She was obviously the funny character of the story.