Should antidepressants be used for treating depression in adolescents and youth?: Podcast assignment

https://soundcloud.com/b3ck92/the-use-of-antidepressants-in

I do not believe blogspot allows for embedding, so above I have the link to my podcast.

My podcast regards the subject of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adolescents and youth and the use of antidepressants when treating MDD. I chose this article because it takes a non-biased stance on the use of medication when treating MDD in adolescents in youth, illustrating both the benefits of consequences of employing medical use in treating MDD in adoelscents. I took certain parts from the article that I felt best demonstarted the topic I was discussing since it was more of a lengthy article and would have exceeded the time limitations for the assignment. Most importantly, I wanted to note the need to decrease the negative stigma associated with the use of medication when treating MDD, specifically in adolescents and youth, in order to clearly recognize the benefits medication has to offer.

I hope you enjoy!

Reference to article discussed in podcast:

National Institute of Mental Health. (n.d.). NIMH · Antidepressant Medications for Children and Adolescents: Information for Parents and Caregivers. National Institute of Mental Health. Retrieved June 21, 2013, from
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/child-and-adolescent-mental-health/antidepressant-                medications-for-children-and-adolescents-information-for-parents-and-caregivers.shtml

Summary: lessening copyright laws and encouraging a cultural commons

         I would like to start off by thanking everyone for their comments. The comments I found on my blog post this week heavily reflected the thoughts that I had originally shared. As Nella noted, I believe there is a true benefit in the social and cultural bonds that music creates, where copyright laws and restrictions hinder the availability and accessibility of content to users and consumers. A cultural commons was previously discussed within module 4 by Lessig (2001), where anyone within the relevant community has access to resources without obtaining permission. When restrictive copyright laws and legislations are placed on music, there is a disruption within the cultural commons where users are unable to access the music to which they should have free permission and access to.

            I find an alternative compensation system crucial to the diminishing of overbearing copyright laws and restrictions, as Lindsay mentioned. As originally noted, the music industry must discern that artists have alternative methods of support other than through specific sales of their music. Even when music is free, true fans will still have the desire to purchase the album or concert tickets, almost making free music sharing applications irrelevant to the downfall of the music industry as Condry (2004) notes. This also intersects with the music industry’s idea that downloading a CD from the Internet is the same as shoplifting a CD from the shelf at the music store. This is not the case at all with exchanging and downloading music online; once one user has downloaded a song or CD, that music is still available to other users. As Nella mentioned, an initial purchase would have been made in order to access an original copy of the music; however, this allows others to access the content for free, further encouraging social and cultural bonds and a cultural commons.

            Finally, as Kamalpreet recognized, music is not a material object and this is exactly why it has the capacity to establish such powerful social and cultural bonds. Rather than focus on the legal and business aspect as McCourt and Burkart (2003) note, cultural production of music must reflect the desires of the consumers/users.  Music is an amazing thing because it can be exchanged and expressed in a variety of ways where users are able to share bonds and discuss aspects of music that may allow them to think differently. This is why it is essential that copyright laws and restrictions are reduced and users are able to access the music with the ease of use which Bradley (2006) notes, connecting users and bringing them together on both a digital and cultural level.

           

 

 

The recording industry vs. consumers: Dealing with the perception of piracy

A conflict can readily be observed regarding the increasing copyright restrictions within the music industry, versus the increasing amount of ‘hackers’ and piracy that are associated with said music. The recording industry follows the popular belief that ‘hackers’ are stealing music through applications such as Napster and Limewire, hence the increase in copyright laws and legislation regarding the music industry. This perspective could possibly be altered through proven research and consumers working together to demonstrate the positive benefits of obtaining a cultural commons. Music is not simply a material object such as a toaster or a computer; music encompasses and creates a culture bringing people together physically, and over the Online community where music can be discussed and exchanged between users and consumers.

As Condry (2004) notes, focusing on fan participation in media success could implement an alternative perspective regarding how to encourage flourishing music cultures, rather than simply focusing on the business and financial aspect of the music industry. This reflects the thoughts of McCourt and Burkart (2003) who note how cultural production is driven more by business models and legal frameworks (copyright restrictions) than it is by consumer/audience desires and practices. If this were the case, music would be more readily available and accessible to users who want to access this music; instead, users who are regarded as ‘hackers’ by the music and recording industry are penalized for their desire to access music. Bradley (2006) remarks upon the importance of ease of use and access that is afforded to “regular folks” in terms of digital media and technology. If consumers are not able to access digital media and technology, how can they use or enjoy such media to create a cultural commons that is so heavily associated with music and media?

A possible suggestion, as made by Condry (2004), is to distinguish an alternative compensation system for musicians and those working within the recording industry, rather than these individuals simply relying on the financial and economical means they earn through direct expense of their music by their consumers, which clearly, they cannot always afford. The underlying concept is to devise new strategies in which artists and entertainment companies are supported in order to offset the losses attributable to unauthorized copyright. Such a suggestion could also potentially decrease the negative consequences associated with expanding enforcement of intellectual property rights.

          It is also important for those working within the recording industry to note that success of artists and musicians does not rely solely on a desire to make money. Piracy cannot be put at exclusive fault for the perceived fall of the music industry as artists are not only supported through the protection of digital content. Decreasing overbearing copyright laws and restrictions may not even affect the music industry as detrimentally as they seem to believe; a lot of music is already available for free, yet people still pay for music by buying CDs and purchasing songs through applications such as iTunes. Downloading a CD is not the same as shoplifting as the media is still available even after an individual user has accessed it (Condry, 2004). The recording industry must see why people want music in the first place; music creates social bonds, further expanding upon the concepts of culture and a cultural commons where individuals can feel connected through the access to content without the hassle of copyright laws and restrictions.

References
 

Bradley, D. (2006) Scenes of Transmission: Youth Culture, MP3 File Sharing, and Transferable Strategies of Cultural Practice. M/C Journal. 9(1).

Condry, Ian. (2004). Cultures of Music Piracy: An Ethnographic Comparison of the US and Japan. International Journal of Cultural Studies. 7 (3), pg. 343-363.

 

McCourt, T., P. Burkart. (2003). When Creators, Corporations and Consumers Collide: Napster and the Development of On-line Music Distribution. Media, Culture & Society. 25 (3), pg. 333-350  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Video: Mental health and youth: Be the change you want to see

For whatever reason, my video will not show up when I search it on youtube, and therefore I can not properly embed it into my blog, so I will include the link.

I hope you enjoy and find it to be knowledgeable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljGF5mCHfHI

Summary of overbearing copyright laws and restrictions: What must we consider?

Overbearing copyright laws and restrictions have detrimentally affected the cultural commons provided by new media and the public domain of the Internet. Part of the reasoning behind such copyright laws and restrictions is to protect the origin of creations found within this new media cultural commons and grant credit where credit is due. Despite the light-hearted appearance of such reasoning, organizations and corporations are actually gaining profit and have become too concerned with gaining such profit, stripping online users of their right to re-create, re-design and re-distribute the content that is found within the new media online. As Jenkins (2004) suggests, corporations have allowed the production, distribution and possession of such works to become substantially more meaningful than the social questions of place, value and relative “worth” of content and works found within the cultural commons that can potentially be produced online. As kpreet92 notes, copyright laws hinder the process of creating and re-designing content and media as they withhold the recycling of media that re-creating requires. If users are granted equal access to content and can show corporations the significance of creating a cultural commons that is equally attainable to all, perhaps dictatorial copyright laws can be replaced with the democratized use of new media to create a cultural commons online.  Lessig (2001) deems a ‘cultural commons’ to include any kind of public domain, and as kh2f00 suggested, the Internet is a public domain in which users should not have to follow specific rules in order to access a cultural commons. The monetary value that corporations place on new media content, mentioned by LEras, can potentially and partially be replaced if corporations and organizations can see the cultural worth in producing content that is available to all, encouraging a positive and connected online community. If corporations and organizations should truly ease up on copyright laws and restrictions, producers must be mindful of the origin of cultural content and media that they do happen to re-create, re-design and re-distribute, as suggested by kh2f00.

Restrictive copyright laws and the cultural commons of new media

Restrictive and overbearing copyright laws and restrictions have deeply affected the capacity and accessibility to create, re-create, design and share media on the Internet for both producers and consumers. ‘Cultural commons’ is a concept regarding the resources to which anyone within the relevant community has a right to access without obtaining permission from anyone else. Common examples of material objects that service as ‘cultural commons’ in potential communities include parks, roads and any kind of public domain (Lessig, 2001). This concept of an equally accessible ‘common’ area to the community is directly applicable to the Internet and new media with the emergence of such new media and technologies. The rise of digital media, and subsequent copyright laws and restrictions, has caused tension as legislative questions concerning production, distribution and possession of such works have become more important than social questions of place, value and relative “worth” of cultural works (Jenkins, 2004). The cultural commons found through the Internet are deeply affected by the restrictive nature of existing copyright laws. Such copyright laws call to question how online communities of “producer-consumers” can literate in new media toward building a robust and freely accessible cultural commons. Most importantly, it is crucial that online-users are reminded and encouraged to be producers as well as consumers of new media. If users are not producing new cultural content, and organizations and corporations are producing elements that are pertinent to cultural content and placing restrictive copyright laws on them, users lose the opportunity to freely access and modify such content.

As Ferguson illustrates in his videos, rather than trying to create a profitable economic market in regards to copyright, extensive copyright laws serve to hinder long-term economic growth by limiting access to creative works of individuals and suppressing potential infinite cultural endeavours of those who desire to contribute to the cultural commons. Despite the positive benefits that ensue from new media, people often fail to recognize the labour and economic development issues that are also associated with new media (Miller, 2004). However, the fact that users want to re-imagine, re-make and re-distribute source material from already existing cultural products demonstrates the need to ease up on copyright restrictions and laws as it displays the democratized and productive impulse of users, and should be recognized, encouraged and celebrated (Manovich, 2008). If users are more heavily influenced and encouraged to be producers instead of consumers, perhaps there would be more of a push for organizations and corporations to ease up on restricting copyright laws that infringe on users’ creativity and accessibility to cultural commons and content.

References

Jenkins, H. (2004) The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence  International Journal of Cultural Studies March 2004 7: 33-43

Manovich, L. (2008). The practice of everyday (media) life: From mass consumption to mass cultural production?. Critical Inquiry, 35(2), 319-331.

Miller, T. (2004) A view from a fossil. International Journal Of Cultural Studies, 7(1), 55-65.