The infamous “KONY 2012” video, having now been released for
about two weeks, at this moment has 82,282,426 views. In the past 14 days, the video has brought in
millions of dollars, the director has been arrested for “sexual misconduct,”
and has just been named the most viral video in history. That’s quite a lot to
handle in just two weeks.
I
think it’s fair to say that since the release of this video, the words “KONY
2012” have shown up everywhere in the media. Newspaper, magazine, radio,
television, and computer sources are all constantly releasing praise,
criticism, rumors and more concerning the KONY 2012 campaign.
While
this complete worldly obsession with KONY 2012 is a bit overwhelming,
what I find more troubling is the tremendous amount of
obliviousness that surrounds this issue with Kony. As mentioned in the video,
most people didn’t even know who Kony was before viewing the video. However,
now, after watching a 30 minute video on YouTube, people seem to think that
they know everything there is to know about the atrocities that Kony is committing.
While the video appears to do a solid job of summarizing
what is going on, it is still only one subjective source. If you only acquire
knowledge (and base your opinion) of the situation from this single source, you
risk having a biased viewpoint.
The Kony 2012 video went viral because it tugged at humans’
heartstrings; it was emotionally captivating. And once you are drawn in, it is
so easy to believe everything you see/hear. Emotions get mixed in with reality,
and suddenly there is no middle line anymore.
People are so quick to deem what they’ve seen in the Kony
video as “the whole truth” that they don’t bother doing research on their own.
I am not discrediting the information in the Kony video, I am just saying that
the creator of the video must have included certain things and excluded certain
things in order to better his argument, and the public should be aware of this.
I don’t know for sure whether the information in the KONY 2012 video is
accurate, I just think it is important to note that it is a complicated issue
that one video cannot possibly cover.
It’s important that we take it upon ourselves to take that
extra step and further investigate for ourselves to help gain a better, more
complete knowledge of Kony, his actions, and the situation in Uganda and its
neighbors. While the KONY 2012 video may be a good place to start, it should
not be the end of our exploration of the topic.
I'm not sure what the basis is for "The Voice's" format; perhaps it was to combat prejudice or perhaps it was to increase viewership through a different show approach. Whatever the case may be, I too think that it is a novel idea to pass someone through in a singing contest solely based on what they sound like.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure it's possible that even when a judge tries his/her hardest to not be biased in their choice of singer, the more attractive ones could very well be more memorable and have a better chance of moving on. In fact, an Op-Ed in the New York Times titled "Ugly? You May Have a Case" (here is the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/opinion/sunday/ugly-you-may-have-a-case.html?_r=1), the author talks about how being attractive puts you at an advantage in society.
It says, that a study found unattractive people made typically $230,000 than an attractive person (the people's looks were based off of results from randomly chosen observers). It's an unfortunate and strange phenomenon in our society, something that might be eliminated through show formats like the one on "The Voice".