Blog

  • Can YouTube Define YOU?

    When you hear the name Tyler Oakley, what comes to mind? If it’s YouTube and over 7 million subscribers, then you’re on the right track! Tyler Oakley is a 26 year-old who became famous through YouTube. Oakley made his initial claim to fame in 2007 when he uploaded his first video as a freshman at Michigan State University. His videos have since gone viral. What is it that makes an ordinary Michigan State college student so popular? Could it be his open nature and willingness to speak about controversial issues? Is it due to others’ ability to relate to a normal college student? Although Tyler Oakley now receives money from sponsors as a result of his amount of subscribers, is he perceived as more authentic than other celebrities simply because he became famous through YouTube and is not actually a paid actor?

    Screen Shot 2015-11-09 at 10.27.09 AMIn his first video, titled “Why Gay Marriage is WRONG,” Oakley takes a satirical approach and provides ten irrational reasons why gay marriage has to be wrong. Despite the title of his first video, Oakley identifies as gay and has obtained a large following from the LGBT community.

    Screen Shot 2015-11-09 at 10.27.49 AM

    Members of the LGBT community, along with many others, now view Oakley as a role model. Whether or not this was Oakley’s intention, he is largely in the public eye and has now has a profound influence on his audience. In a recent interview with TIME magazine, Oakley indicated it does not matter whether or not he intends to be a role model for others. If people are looking up to him, he has the potential to influence their lives in a positive or negative way, which is where authenticity comes to play. When Oakley uploaded his first video in 2007, he was not following a script. No one was telling him what to say or how to say it. Instead, he was simply sharing his own views. At that time, it likely would have been difficult for Oakley to imagine he would one day have over 7 million subscribers. Now that Oakley receives sponsorship via YouTube, does this make the content he produces less authentic? Or has he stayed true to the values and beliefs expressed prior to receiving money from sponsors?

    We live in a commodity culture, which means we define ourselves by the commodities we consume. Although Tyler Oakley’s YouTube videos are intangible, they can be viewed as commodities that help define his audience members. The messages Oakley conveys, whether intentional or unintentional, inevitably influence his viewers. Some may choose to watch Oakley’s videos because they identify with the LGBT community. Others may watch Oakley’s videos simply because they find him humorous or they enjoy his hipster image. Regardless of their reasoning, Oakley’s 7 million plus subscribers have found a way to connect with him and the brand narrative he has created for himself.

    Why do you think Tyler Oakley has become so popular? Are viewers more likely to buy in to what YouTubers say as opposed to paid actors? Are Oakley’s videos worthy of over 7 million subscribers? Do you agree that simply watching videos on YouTube help can define you as a person? If so, how? Please share your thoughts in the comment section below!

  • So If I Make A YouTube Video Will I Get Famous Too?

    pewdiepie

    Felix Kjellberg aka PewDiePie

    “Creativity out of necessity.” In 2005 the most successful free video streaming site was created by three college graduates who had a major dilemma…

    …They couldn’t find footage of the famous Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” during the 2015 Super Bowl halftime show….

    And so YouTube was born.

    YouTube has evolved to so much more than a free and easy way to see inappropriate videos of celebrities. Now it’s so sophisticated that people can earn their livings video blogging, or vlogging, about anything they want. The site started with one unfortunate (or maybe fortunate, depends on how you look at it…) celebrity “wardrobe malfunction,” and now YouTube is making a whole new category of celebrities; self-made vloggers.

    bilde

    Jenna Mourey aka Jenna Marbles: YouTube personality, vlogger, comedian, and actress

    Just as YouTube has changed over the years, the vloggers that scramble to be the next big internet sensation have started to move from computer screens to larger ones. Jenna Mourey or Jenna Marbles as she is known on YouTube is the top female vlogger with well over 15 million subscribers which ranks her channel seventh overall. Mourey now can be seen in episodes of Epic Rap Battles in History, Fake n’ Bacon, and Ridiculousness. Hannah Hart who rose to fame with My Drunk Kitchen, and hosting cameos on Mental Floss sat down with People last week to promote her upcoming TV mini-series Electra Woman & Dyna Girl airing in 2016. Then there is PewDiePie, with 40 million subscribers and over 6 billion views Felix Kjellberg has raised YouTube vlogging to an art form. By basically inviting the world into his living room to watch him play video games, Kjellberg makes $12 million dollars a year and is helping to shape the indie gamer market. Like the Oprah effect, when Kjellberg mentions a game it sees a spike in sales.

    According to People.com, these YouTube blogger channels make the most money:

    1. Felix Kjellberg

    – $12 Million a Year

    Channel: PewDiePie

    Subscribers: 40 million

    Shtick: Playing video games and making jokes

    2. Ian Hecox and Anthony Padilla

    – $8.5 Million a Year

    Channel: Smosh

    Subscribers: 21 million

    Shtick: Live-action comedy sketches

    3. Benny and Rafi Fine

    – $8.5 Million a Year

    Channel: Fine Brothers Entertainment

    Subscribers: 13 million

    Shtick: Reacting to things

    Screen-Shot-2014-07-01-at-11.40.44-AM

    2014 VidCon Youtuber Convention

    YouTube has become so popular that they have dedicated a whole convention, VidCon, to the videos and YouTube “stars”.  VidCon features workshops and speeches on how to launch your own YouTube career, video highlights, and YouTube celebrities waiting to meet their fans.  For a few hundred dollars fans can attend the three-day conference, with varying levels of entry to events.  Tickets range from general entry at only $100 for the “Super Early Birds”, to $750 for the Industry Standard Price.  For those interested in the online video industry beyond basic video production the industry ticket is the way to go.VIdCon offers a variety of events for industry professionals including: seminars, keynote speakers, and helpful tips on how to use online video to promote your company.

    There are many benefits for marketing your brand via YouTube:

    1. Capturing attention: Posting creative content on YouTube is an easy way to catch viewer’s attention.
    2. High Traffic Volumes: There are over 1 billion users on YouTube which is an excellent platform to reach people all over the world.
    3. Viral Marketing: YouTube videos are easily shared between friends and family members and can be shared with others, thus creating a ripple effect.
    4. Multiple Video Marketing Channels: Creating and posting videos to YouTube is a powerful and recognizable way for users to view your content.
    5. Search Engine Rankings: Google owns YouTube, which why it is so highly ranked when you search for videos on Google’s page.
    6. Social Media Marketing Integration: YouTube videos can be shared via email, Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, Reddit and other social media platforms.
    7. World-Wide Accessibility: Posting content on YouTube can be seen in 75 different countries, since YouTube is available in 61 languages. This is one the most effective marketing strategies since YouTube is available 24/7.

    Who are your favorite YouTube stars? Do you have your own YouTube channel? Share with us in the comments below!

    Aki Suzuki, Carey Poniewaz, Carey Shetterley, Lexie Trimnal, June Wilkinson

  • Social Media: Authentically Inauthentic?

    Before the invention of social media, the word “celebrity” was reserved for people who walked the red carpet. Fame was earned by movie roles, album releases, and tv series’ success. The invention of social media has led to a new kind of celebrity where success is not determined by Grammy or Emmy nominations, but instead by number of likes, favorites, and retweets. Social media platforms like Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Vine, and YouTube have opened new doors for users of any age who have a quick wit, an innovative idea, or are simply great at marketing themselves.

    Essena O’Neill earned her celebrity status in high school through Instagram, blogging and YouTube. The beautiful, fit Australian posted pictures that accumulated thousands of likes and repeatedly landed spots on Instagram’s “popular” page. Brands noticed and began reaching out to her to endorse their products to her half a million followers. These opportunities led to modeling deals in Los Angeles, California. As far as internet stardom goes, Essena had made it. She was making a career out of what people perceived as her “being herself” online. enhanced-13518-1446650321-1

    Recently, the 18-year-old has been making headlines for a different reason: she not only quit social media but is publicly condemning it. Essena quit social media in pursuit of a more authentic life. She created a website titled Let’s Be Game Changers to explain her choice and to encourage others to live more authentically. In a blog titles Social Media is not Real Life she writes, “social media -as the current system of numbers and money dictates- is not genuine life. It’s purely contrived images and edited clips ranked against each other. It’s a system based on social approval, likes and dislikes, validation in views, success in followers… it’s perfectly orchestrated judgement.” Essena claims she was paid hundreds of dollars by companies for sharing a single picture of her wearing their product.

    Thanks to postmodern consumer culture, it’s become the social norm to define yourself using brand names. So, is it so wrong for Instagram users to accept payment for posting pictures of themselves wearing brands? Essena thinks so. “They don’t tell you (just like I didn’t) because then any conscious minded individual would distrust their judgment and therefore not blindly buy the product. If the influencer told you that they made $1000 from the promotion it would completely contradict the company’s aim.”

    Essena brings up an interesting point about brands and social media transparency. However, was she at fault for playing a part in fooling her audience? Andrew Potter takes a deeper look into brand transparency in his novel The Authenticity Hoax using what he defines as “plagiarism”. His definition states it is “a form of intellectual dishonesty that has the desire for concealment or deception at it’s aim.” Essena admits her previously inauthentic lifestyle was dictated by the pressure to be popular on social media and the endorsement of brands.

    Essena has received an abundance of positive feedback about her decision to quit social media. However, not everyone agrees with the stance she is taking. Social media CEO and popular YouTube vlogger Zack James claims: “Social media can be whatever the user desires it to be. Allowing yourself to become pressured into a false life that you’re uncomfortable with is the result of your own actions and intent. The inability to define yourself, your life, your own sense of confidence comes from a lack of trying to understand yourself.”

    Does Essena have a right to hold social media responsible for her lack of living an authentic lifestyle? Comment your thoughts below!

    -Griffin Weidele, Austin Moody, Luci Keefer, Allen Wooten, Scott Uraro

  • Groupthink in Political Marketing

    The media has become the primary medium in which politicians reach their publics. Although hosting live debates, press conferences and news reports have been increasingly helpful in reaching their audiences throughout the years, the ever-growing trend of social media has taken the political world by storm. Politicians today have the luxury of marketing themselves over countless social media and online platforms. Over recent years, candidates have utilized these growing sites to further their campaigns and to get their name out there; however, these sites can cause people to form judgements based on the group rather than their own personal opinions.

    Groupthink theory is when a group makes a decision without analyzing all of the options and deciding based on maintaining the group unity, rather than what is best overall. We see the idea of Groupthink in followers of candidates like Bernie Sanders and Ben Carson. Supporters of Bernie claim to be democrats, but are they claiming this because of what they believe or are they simply fitting into a precreated mold? Same with Carson’s supporters – are they focused on the issues or maintaining the title of “Republican?”

    blog photo

    Democrats and Republicans have specified views of what they believe, and these views are often polarized. For example, democrats are known to support change for global warming, LGBT rights, peace rather than war overseas, and evolving governmental policies. Republicans, on the other hand, are known to support keeping government out of personal lives, stronger military action, and ensuring America stays rooted in its original ideas and upholding tradition. Upon visiting Bernie Sanders website, one can immediately see his blatant liberal views. Under the “issues” tab, there are countless links to guide a visitor to Bernie’s platform on topics like: “climate change and environment,” “fighting for LGBT equality,” and “war should be the last option.” After visiting Ben Carson’s website, the same holds true, but for Republicans. The “Issues” tab displays, “protecting innocent life,” “protect the second amendment,” and “keep faith in our society.”

    groupthink1

    While it is easy to see these websites as simply a way of marketing a candidate, we, as students of Communication Studies, can recognize a pattern of Groupthink. In other candidates such as Donald Trump, the idea is Groupthink is not as prevalent because his views are so radical. It is imperative to this nation’s political system for voters to be confident in their beliefs before stepping up to the ballot box, rather than the idea of associating themselves with one political party.

    Are you guilty of groupthink or do you form your political views based on your own thoughts and opinions?
    -Nick, Melanie, Mary & Patrick

  • Income Inequality, Campaign Finance, and the Decline of American Democracy

    For the past few decades, the bulk of wealth in America floods to the top- 99% of the new income is going to the wealthiest 1%. Billionaires have the ability to agenda set and fund politicians for their own interests. The Koch brothers alone are projected to spend almost one billion dollars funding campaigns.

    distribution.of_.wealthElections, in turn, have become similar to television shows with aggressive personas rising to the top. Donald Trump, Ben Carson, and Carly Fiorina- whose politics have been called “post-truth” are jockeying for the republication nomination. On the Democratic side, there’s Clinton whose views seem to change in accordance with her largest donors. And the weird things is, people don’t seem to care. But is it really their fault?

    635718223146293175-AP-Republicans-DebatePoliticians’ advertisements can be somewhat skewed to adhere to our wants and needs. We watch the political debates to see which candidate will resonate with our personal values, but all that is discussed are issues not solutions. The message the media projects about politics focuses on the conflict at hand. Is conflict ever resolved or is it just discussed? Politicians have the chance to engage with a wide audience, the debates streaming on TV and throughout social media. The engagement perspective of IMC says a message is intended to get a response from the audience. Will the audience reject or accept it? Will it change their behaviors once the message is received? The political debates allow candidates to persuade their audiences to think differently.

    The media has an obligation, as a forum by which citizens receive their news, to provide viewers with relevant and truthful information. According to the agenda-setting theory, media influence affects the order of presentation in news reports about events and issues in the public mind. In the context of election time, news outlets control how the political candidates and issues are presented to their viewers.

    If people get 90% of their information about politics from TV and the TV station’s parent company has an interest in the outcome an election, can the viewers be blamed for following along? How much responsibility should we place on journalists and media outlets? Has the concentration of wealth at the top of America’s population and the ability for wealthy individuals to shape our elections transformed our democracy? 

    -Jonathan Callahan, Erin Fouhy, Julia George, Joseph Hines, and Sarah Suggs

  • Donald Trump: An IMC Approach

    Donald Trump: An IMC Approach

    Donald Trump

    By Daniel Dawson

    The race for our next presidential candidates has been nothing short of entertaining this year, to say the least. The Republican Party’s posterchild, Donald J. Trump, is currently the frontrunner in polls. When Trump announced his presidential campaign, our nation couldn’t help but look incredulously at the millionaire mogul who’s already built his successful brand through business, franchises and TV networks. Despite bluntness, controversial statements and even discrepancies in political speeches, Trump has garnered the support of thousands of Republicans and the praise of being one of the most candid, or “authentic” candidates—but how and why?

    Perceptions of Authenticity

    Can a political candidate, or anyone for the matter, be authentic? In short, no. Or at least this is what Andrew Potter argues, author of The Authenticity Hoax, a 2010 book that criticizes the modern individual’s search for an ultimately unattainable “authentic” self.

    In his chapter titled “Vote for me, I’m Authentic” Potter delves into the issue of voter apathy in democratic societies and how political campaigning and the media affect this. Most of us are used to manufactured speeches and the all-talk-no-results perception of politicians—and there’s been a trend of voter apathy, or the choice to not vote, in developed countries.

    Trumps political extremism manufactures a perception of authenticity which could motivate U.S. citizens to vote who may consider themselves apathetic. He delivers seemingly uncensored and extemporaneous speeches—however questionable they may be—that echo his results-oriented business background. Why does he have a larger following than, say, Carly Fiorina, former CEO of HP and businesswoman alike?

    The Media Controls It

    Agenda-setting theory, anyone? This communication theory says that the media manipulates what the public thinks is important. Basically, whatever stories have the most coverage in the news become the “important” issues—the flavor of the week. Trump, for a variety of reasons, has been covered practically every day by some type of media outlet since he announced his participation in the race. You probably have read a story or two about Trump, even if you didn’t want to.

    In a recent example of agenda setting not involving Trump—who won the first Democratic debate? Major media reports that Hillary Clinton was the clear winner when, according to online polls, Bernie Sanders was voted the winner by viewers. Is this a disparity of choice or opinion? Potter writes, “The media’s pundit class feeds this gladiatorial conception of political debates by treating them as a boxing match, with the post-debate analysis invariably focused on who scored what points, and whether any of the candidates was able to strike the mythical “knockout blow” (p. 172). While the media like to sensationalize, there are other factors involving what the media cover. In short, the media, across multiple outlets, can report that Hillary Clinton won when voters disagree.  How do we evaluate the ways we receive our news?

    Trump’s Brand

    Like all political candidates, Trump is a brand. Donald Trump is a symbol, a message and a vehicle for his message. Trump is a business icon and has built an empire over many years, but why is Trump running for president, too? Political IMC is integral to the success or failure of a candidate’s campaign—establishing ethos, effective marketing, political advertising, event planning and speech writing are just some components that go into the branding of a politician.

    “‘’Some people think this will be good for my brand,’ Trump concluded, as deep as he probes. ‘I think it’s irrelevant for my brand.’” This blasé quote came from Trump himself in a feature written by Mark Leibovich in the New York Times Magazine.

    I disagree with Mr. Trump. For public figures, every extension of oneself, every action, participation, speech, statement, declaration affects one’s brand. One’s brand is the essence and the story of who they are. While Trump will probably only gain revenue and face time with his campaign, to say that it doesn’t affect his brand is nonsense. Whether it’s good or bad is a value judgment, but it’s fair to say that is not now, Trump’s brand will see the effects of this year’s political campaign.

  • Politics Are Funny

    The emails were really just used for “Fun woman talk” and the ‘“Unsexiest email ever to Bill Clinton”- Kate McKinnon impersonating Hillary Clinton in an Saturday Night Live spoof in March of this year.

    Beyond Bernie Sanders epic declaration “the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails”, McKinnon’s SNL spoof may be most well remembered moment in the Clinton email saga.

    McKinnon played Clinton in an SNL episode soon after the private email scandal first broke loose, while Clinton herself made a guest appearance on the show. In October Clinton made a second appearance on SNL taking full advantage of SNL’s comedic twist yet again. She tweeted after the show “A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for four more years of Kate McKinnon’s impression #citizens.”  Following the show, audiences began to see Hillary in a different light.  Previously, she had a reputation for being cold and dull.  Afterwards, audiences had a new respect for her and her ability to poke fun at herself, and make light of past situations she has been in.  Performing on SNL was helpful in Hillary’s branding, making her more relateable and “human” to the target audiences she wanted to reach as a democratic candidate for the 2016 presidential election.

    Screenshot 2015-10-29 17.56.31Clinton isn’t the first nor will she be the last politician to appeal to SNL’s satiric take on politics and the scandals that dominate campaigns and news headlines.  Presidential candidates alone who have recently made appearances or hosted SNL during their campaigns include John McCain, Chris Christie, George H.W.  Bush, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Obama and Hillary Clinton herself. The SNL dynamic provides an alternative and juxtaposed coverage opportunity for politicians whom we associate with stiff suits, stuffy press conferences and distant televised speeches.

    Politicians employ multiple strategies of branding themselves, often with formal news based media, and traditional advertising and campaigning efforts, but SNl proved throughout the years that politicians can also make their campaign worth a few good laughs. When politicians choose to go on a comedy show like SNL is a step further than being interviewed by John Stewart or Stephen Colbert. SNL’s audience includes people who follow politics but also includes a whole segment of people who don’t. Appearing on SNL is a way for politicians to reach these publics and show everyone that they have a personality beyond formal media interactions. This recent movement for presidents and presidential candidates to act on SNL started with Gerald Ford and has been successful in adding positive aspects to their brand, just like the changed perceptions of Hillary Clinton.

    Donald Trump and his quote of the day have become America’s latest source of entertainment, leaving some Americans wondering whether his campaign is little more than a publicity stunt.  Whether you are a Trump fan or not, November 7th is not an SNL episode to miss out on. Trump will be hosting SNL bringing his own Trump style “authenticity” to the table. With SNL delivering its witty and sarcastic take on politics, viewers may just want to stop, put the remote down and kick back for what promises to be much more humorous than yet another presidential debate.

    Donald Trump

    Aki Suzuki, Carey Poniewaz, Carey Shetterly, Lexie Trimnal, June Wilkinson