Blog 2

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ec_RlTnr-iE
For this blog, I watched part of an “Ali G” episode where he interviews Ralph Nadar and other people who support the Green Party. The subject is the Green Party’s position on many issues, which is of course a controversial one as politics usually are. This piece I believe is addressed to an adult audience and more specifically to those who are politically aware at least to some extent. The tone of the text is comical, and seems to be more focused on Ali G’s mockery of the Green Party. The purpose is mostly to amuse the audience and though the topic is controversial, I do not think in any way it tries to persuade or inform the audience. The humor mostly lies in what Ali G says and asks the people he interviews and sometimes when the interviewees try to respond to his absurd questions. The text shows two discourses interacting. On the one hand, there is Ali G who is a wannabe gangster character and then there is Ralph Nadar who ran for President in 2000. The author is applying a professional discourse to a foreign situation in which it does not fit in. This creates amusement for the audience as they watch the two different types of people attempt to have a conversation, where one is serious and professional (Ralph Nadar) and the other is just an entertainer playing an outrageous yet humorous character (Ali G). There is also another discourse that appears when Ali G interviews supporters of the Green Party. These people, as Ali G refers to them are “loose, hippy bitches”. Ali G in this situation becomes more of the “foreigner” as he goes to the dessert to support an anti-nuclear protest. In the beginning of his first interview with one of the “hippies” this discourse is noticeably clear when Ali G asks if they should sit or stand and she says sit, so that they can be closer to the earth. This merging of these discourses creates an awkward yet again funny situation, which seems to be a trend with Ali G’s shows.

Blog 1

http://youtube.com/watch?v=K4VieMjZYfI
My first blog is an analysis of a SNL skit pertaining to the unveiling of the iPhone. The iPhone is another clever invention by Mac and this skit exaggerates the smugness of that Mac is often recognized for. The controversy over the iPhone and advertising for it really only has to do with the publics' preference of whether they like Mac or not. This skit appeals to an audience of young adults to adults and specifically those interested in new technology. Overall, the skit makes fun of how many things the iPhone can do. The iPhone in reality is like a mini-computer and phone combined capable of playing music, shows, movies, accessing the internet, storing pictures and of course making phone calls. This skit ridicules the iPhone by listing even more nonsensical applications that obviously aren’t part of the iPhone. The tone of the skit is noticeably comical. The Apple CEO talks in at a slow pace and occasionally repeats himself and acts with a smugness as though the iPhone is the most important thing on earth. The purpose of this skit is to ridicule the iPhone. The skit not only makes fun of all the excitement that came with its unveiling and the “cocky” people behind the invention, but it mainly just makes fun of the invention as a whole. Who really needs to be on the phone, listening to music and surfing the web at the same time? No one. That is what this skit is getting at. Our technology today keeps growing and growing and something more impressive or advanced is always coming out. Now we have a phone that can do anything, but what is so necessary about that? This skit just goes to make fun of how our society is obsessed with innovative technology and how ridiculous it can sometimes be. The author is obviously appealing to the audiences emotions and trying to make them understand his opinion of the iPhone by mockery. I think he was successful in doing this because many of the comments on the site put down Apple and agree that the skit is funny.