First I have to say that I am really enjoying this book. Their critical perspective of the media is enlightening and I think most people would benefit from reading this, not just those in fields that are involved in media studies. And if you haven't read "A Shout Out!" or their bios I highly recommend you do, they are too funny. I think the original cover would have given the book more personality, but I guess the publishers did not feel the same.

In the chapter on "Pragmatic Analysis" Ott and Mack discuss various reasons for government intervention and regulation of the media, such as preventing monopolies and protecting intellectual property that seem necessary and pragmatic, and regulating morality which seems like it might be an overstepping of government power. I found this to be particularly problematic in the different ways the government handles sexual programing versus violent programing. Obscenity is illegal, profanity and indecency are tightly regulated, but violence does not appear to be so closely regulated, and I find this method censorship to be quite confusing. Why ban sex on television but allow violence? Sex is a natural act that, when occurring between consensual adults, does not typically harm anybody else. But violence is, well, violent. Are we regulating sex on television because we are afraid it will lead to more sex? And if that is the main reason, then shouldn't violence be treated in a similar manner? And should sex in the media really be so closely regulated at all? European countries tend to have looser laws regarding sex and nudity on television and their societies do not seem to be suffering from moral decay because of it.

This topic is particularly important at this time since, after the mass shooting in Connecticut (one of many in the past couple decades) government officials have been studying the effects of violent media on society. Perhaps in our lifetime we might see strict regulations on violence in the media, particularly of the gore and stylized types that seem to serve no purpose other than entertainment. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing the end of the Grand Theft Auto games and others of the same type, although I do worry about freedom of speech.

The description of semiotics in the chapter on "Rhetorical Analysis" was helpful in gaining a better understanding of the concept. I had a rudimentary understanding of semiotics before reading this, and it definitely made the abstract concept more clear in my mind.

The chapter "Cultural Analysis" represents another perspective on an issue we have been discussing both in this class and in most of my other classes from both this semester and the last: the representation of different groups of people, in this case in the media. Hopefully, the persistence of cultural studies in college curriculum is a sign of increased cultural awareness in society. I'm not sure if a fully integrated community of differing races will ever truly exist, and if so how exactly it would appear and operate, but I think it is a goal that is definitely worth striving for. And as for the American Dream, I leave you with a quote from George Carlin: "The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it."