Qaddafi: Dictator or Fashion Icon?

It's really shocking to me that during a period of incredible turmoil in Libya, the media would have the audacity to put aside the real issues, and instead reflect on Muammar Qaddafi's fashion sense throughout the years. The Atlantic reported in a recent article, "How the Media's Covered Qaddafi's Clothing Through the Years," that ABC already put together a slide show of his fashion mishaps throughout the years. Time Magazine named Qaddafi one of worst dressed leaders.
Here's an example of a Qaddafi fashion show with commentary from NBC's Nancy Foreman (video from The Atlantic article): http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5orKHwtEZsI
We discussed in our last class the media's obsession with political scandal, and gave numerous examples for types of scandals, from bribes, to affairs, to fashion. I can understand why the public would be interested in knowing whether its leader was engaging in illegal activity, since that act is simply an example of his or her general behavior. But to focus on their dress, as though it defines who they are, I say: seriously? 

Self-Critical?

I've always had reservations about blogging. In general, I'm a huge fan of social media, and the effect it can have on society. However, bloggers always come across as angry skeptics whose ideas would never fly in mainstream news sources. Therefore, they create a blog, an outlet for all of their opinions and concerns, and demand an audience from those who read the newspapers that would never publish these views. 

I think Maureen Dowd, a columnist in the New York Times, really captures a huge concern with blogging in her column, "Stars and Sewers." She explains that "We watch in awe as revolutions somersault through the Middle East. We see instantaneous digital communication as a weapon against oppression and, in the hands of tyrants who tap into its power, as a weapon for oppression. While the cloud spurs some people to reach for the stars, delighting in freedom of expression, it seduces others to sprawl in the gutter, abusing freedom of expression." 

Her column discusses the horrible nightmare NBC reporter Lara Logan recently experienced. While reporting in Egypt, Logan was separated from her team and was sexually assaulted by Egyptian protestors. Of course, the majority of the media came out praising Logan for her noble efforts as a reporter, and condemning the assailants for their disgusting behavior. However, there were several bloggers who reacted differently. They were extremely critical of Logan, and attacked her in her most vulnerable state. Dowd quoted several bloggers, for example: “She got what she deserved,” [a Yahoo viewer] said. “This is what happens when dumb sexy female reporters want to make it about them.” Hillbilly Nation chimed in: “Should have been Katie.”"

So my question is, is the public abusing the freedom of expression and taking it too far? 

Instant Gratification Becomes Even More Instant

I know this is old news, but I'm still amazed by our generation and how communication has become even more instantaneous than ever before! I must admit that my last post was a bit cynical, but a recent article I happend upon has really given me a new perspective. In The Atlantic, an article entitled "How Word of Mubarak's Resignation Spread on Social Media," indicated that the news spread most on Facebook, leaving other favorites such as Twitter and e-mail in the dust.
A company called ShareThis, which tracks hour-by-hour email, Twitter, and Facebook exchanges, shows that early on Friday, Feb 11, before Mubarak officially announced his resignation, people used these three modes of communication pretty evenly. However, after the announcement came, the usage of Facebook spiked, and remained the most utilized method, while Tweets also increased somewhat, but both severely outnumbered e-mail.
It's interesting that the once most talked about method of communication was the least utilized method here. It makes me realize that not only have we become more technologically advance, but we have taken our need for instant gratification to a whole new level. E-mail used to be the technology that epitomized this mentality, but now there are even newer, more advanced tools that make us even more connected at lightning speed.
When people think about instant gratification, negative connotations come to mind. I share this attitude, but I guess I never fully appreciated the benefits and impact of such tools until the Egyptian protests. To think that as a result of these methods of communication, an entire movement was formed and managed to overthrow its leadership, is incredible. This just goes to show the awesome opportunity an individual or a group has to effect change through the various social media tools that are available to us today. Obviously, this isn't the first case where social media has been utilized to effect change. The current administration relied on this heavily during the campaign and continues to utilize it today, and many social justice groups create groups on Facebook and Twitter in order to spread their missions.
These are obviously only a few examples of the power of social media, but I'm constantly fascinated by positive way these tools have been utilized.

What's in a name?

We are a generation that depends on instant gratification. Everything is marketed in the here and now. Our brains are wired to think in the short-term, without considering the long-term ramifications. In addition, we've grown to expect to get whatever we want without exerting any effort. This societal norm is exemplified by our dependence on computers, but more specifically, on laptops.
First commercially distributed in 1981, but not widely available until the late 80's, laptops have taken over our lives in a way no other machine has done before or since. It is the all-knowing source of information. Over the years it has taken on more and more roles; from Microsoft Word to the World Wide Web, laptops are the go-to gadget for anyone who wants to stay connected. As a college student, I rely on it heavily for my classes. Between note taking, paper researching and writing, communication, and news and current events, my laptop is with me for most of my waking hours. As I'm sure you'd assume, I'm writing this blog on my laptop, and you readers are most likely reading this on your own.
While I am a proud laptop owner, I of course struggle to balance my real life, filled with interpersonal relationships and real awareness of the world around me, and my cyber life, complete with all that's been mentioned above. It's never easy turning it off when I should be studying or going to sleep. So now I wonder, how has the existence of the laptop influenced society? It's indicative in the name of the product that one can sit anywhere and enjoy its small size, light-weight, portable nature. We are conditioned to get used to the idea that we don't have to put an ounce of effort into attaining anything - it can be reached by this handy dandy device. Suddenly we find ourselves enslaved by a machine that keeps us from getting out of bed, or moving from our desk, in order to actually be productive in our day. So maybe when trying to understand what's created this generation that's so strongly embraced the idea of instant gratification, we can turn to these small machines as the source of our own demise. Thoughts?