Is Taxing Pop Really a Solution?

Over the course of the last few years - we have seen a new initiative coming from many different sources - where their goal is to get everyone healthy. We have seen it in movies, like Super Size Me - where the main character sets out to eat nothing but McDonalds for a whole month. Of course in the end there were many health repercussions from doing this and it probably turned many people off from eating at McDonald's ever again. From there - we have seen a lot of fast food chains introduceing healthy menu choices - like salads and apples and oranges instead of french fries. Now don't get me wrong - all of these are good steps towards becoming a healthier nation - but is it enough?

This initiative has recently been observed in schools. Elementary schools started instituting a regular physical activity time and in the high schools they stopped stocking pops and chips and candies in all but one place in the school. In the United States some schools don't even have vending machines. Even this year our own cafeteria has started to cook in a healthier way as they have a mandate to meet that was set out by our school board. And have you noticed the vending machine on the first floor - most of the chocolate bars and chips have been replaced with granola bars and crackers.

Recently I was listening to the radio and came across a news segment that was reporting that the state of New York wants to impose a new tax on pop. Their reason - pop is extremely unhealthy and causes so many health issues that then result in high health care costs. You can read the article from the New York Times here. Here are a few other articles that may be of interest as well:

- Studies
- Tax Proposal
- President Obama

Now although this tax isn't for sure, in the meantime - the New York Health Department has started a campaign against pop. They even produced a video that has many people turning away in disgust:




Now you tell me.
Is this kind of scare campaign effective? Does it make you want to become a healthier person? Do you think that the growing obesity in our nation is an epidemic of large proportions? Tell us how you responded to the video above? If the new tax goes through in America - what's to say that it won't happen here? If it does - would you continue to pay a large sum of money for something like pop or chips?

Photo Manipulation on Hiatus in the Media?

OK - so we all know very well that pretty much every image in the media that we see has been magically touched by Photoshop. Photoshop can be a great tool - but it can also be an evil weapon. I would argue that most images that are used in the media have been photoshopped just a bit too much. Here are a few examples:

Back in October, the National Post had an article in their paper titled "Picture-Perfect Manipulation" by Nathalie Atkinson. In this article the writer discusses some major ethical concerns when it comes to using photoshop and the media. One of the main culprits that she talks about is Ralph Lauren. The campaign: Ralph Lauren Blue Label starring model Filippa Hamilton. In this image it is clearly a case of photoshopping gone bad. Here is a before and after picture of the model;



And yet another example here - of Jessica Simpson being shaved down to the point where her hair is wider than her waist!



These are just two examples - there are uncountable amounts of magazines and advertising companies that do the very same thing - shave off a little bit here, push up a little bit there - and in the end sometimes crossing the line. What kind of message is being pushed onto us if this is the kind of examples we are starting to see each day.

Using Photoshop in this manner is such an easy thing to do. Here is a little example of how one of the photo editors did the same thing to one of their colleagues at the National Post:




Now for the good news! It seems that many are simply saying enough is enough! People are tired of seeing images of unrealistic people. This then sparked an idea for photographer Peter Lindbergh. In September 2009 he did a photoshoot with 9 supermodels - all of whom bared their true faces - with no make-up - to prove that real beauty is within! These images were printed in Bazzar Magazine as their main fashion spread for the month.







And since then, more and more celebrities are starting to follow this trend! These images were taken and published in People magazine for their "50 Most Beautiful People" spread.




And finally - some magazines and fashion shows are taking that extra step and are using "normal" people on the runway and in fashion spreads: here is one example from V Magazine.



After reading this post - and all the links that are connected - tell us what you think! How do you feel about the photoshopped images gone bad? Can you think of any other examples where you have seen this and thought to yourself - "wow that looks strange!". Share one of those examples with us in your blog. Does it bother you that companies are constantly crossing the line with their manipulations - or do you see it as just the way it is? How about this new trend where models and celebrities are baring their make-up free faces and saying "no" to photoshop? Is it a trend that will stick? What about the idea of magazines and runways using "normal" people, like the young, the old and the size 16 ladies? What is your reaction when you look at a magazine spread that isn't all glammed up like we are used to seeing? Share any of your thoughts and ideas on any of these issues.

Website Credits:
http://www.trendhunter.com/
http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/

The Changing Face of Video Games

In the past, games were solely created for the purpose of entertainment. Instead of going to the arcade, you could play Pong right at home. Later, Mario Bros. took homes by storm as Mario and Luigi embarked on adventures in living rooms. Later still, parents everywhere fretted that their children were spending way too much time playing video games and what kind of impact those games were having on their children. Games are definately evolving. They have changed drastically over the past three decades, not only in content, but in quality.



Nintendo, especially, has taken strides to attract specific audiences that were not catered to in the past. For example, the Wii Fit was the first of what has now become a new genre in the video game world, "exergames," where the gamer becomes a physical participant in the game. A few other innovative themes include cooking, brain training, educational, as well as living a virtual life and keeping virtual pets.



The question is, have games evolved enough to the point that they are beneficial to you, rather than detrimental? Or are they merely wolves in sheep's clothing? If they appear too good to be true, maybe they are. Are these new game genres still considered games or have they evolved into something new? What do you think?